Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v.

Union of India, AIR

1996 SC 1446

Facts –
This was a writ petition filed against a group of chemical factories
(Respondents), owned and run by the same group of individuals and situated in
the same geographical area, by an environmentalist organization named the
Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action (Petitioner). This community was based
in Bicchri, a small village located in Rajasthan, India, in the Udaipur District.
The first major industrial establishment, Hindustan Zinc Limited- a public
sector, was established north of this village. The real problem began in 1987
when a chemical factory, Hindustan Argo Chemicals Limited, began producing
chemicals such as Oleum (a concentrated form of sulphuric acid) and Single
Super Phosphates.
And the real calamity took place when a sister concern of it, Silver Chemicals,
began the production of ‘H’ acid in their plant exclusively for export purposes.
The manufacture of ‘H’ acid gave rise to enormous quantities of highly toxic
effluents, especially iron-based and gypsum-based sludge, which posed serious
threats and consequences to the Earth if not correctly handled. By-products
were poisonous.
These all produced the development of toxic effluents in that particular area
which is not properly handled by the industries.
According to a survey, during the processing of approximately 375 tonnes of
‘H’ acid, about 2500 tonnes of highly toxic sludge was released which were not
adequately disposed of by these facilities and thrown out in the open in the field
areas instead.
This has had seriously detrimental consequences. The soil and water had been
degraded, making it unfit for cultivation, which was a huge blow for the
villagers for most of them relied on agriculture for their livelihoods. Among the
villagers, the chemicals caused death and sickness.
Such catastrophic results raised an echo in the Parliament and the Minister
promised that action would be taken but nothing successful was done on the
spot. The villagers then revolted, leading to the imposition by the District
Magistrate of the region of Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code and the
shutdown of Silver Chemicals in January 1989.
Issues –
1) If such activity causes damage to the lives, health, and livelihoods of
individuals who might be subject to risk due to such activity, what should
be the amount of obligation of companies engaged in a dangerous
industrial activity?
2) Will the respondents be responsible for paying the original amount of
compensation or a new amount of interest because they have deferred
compliance with the judgment?

Principle Applied –
The court applied the ‘Polluter Pays’ concept for the first time. This concept
requires that “the financial costs of preventing or remedying the damage caused
by pollution should be incurred by undertakings that cause or produce pollution-
causing goods.”

Judgement –
The Supreme Court relied on the judgment given in M. C. Mehta v. Union of
India. This case is responsible for the inclusion and evolution in India of the law
of absolute responsibility. Intentionally, the respondent sectors have failed to
comply with the orders of the court. As no successful corrective steps have been
taken so far, a large number of residents have already been seriously affected.
The court ruled that the amount of compensation for losses and remedial steps
will be determined by the central government. In the event of non-compliance
on the part of the respondents, the court noted that, in accordance with the law
under which the court directed the factories, plants, machinery, and all other
immovable assets owned by the respondents to be attached, the central
government could recover the amount.
The respondent industries were ordered to pay Rs. 37,385,000 INR along with a
compound interest of 12 percent annually after 11 April 1997 before the amount
had been fully charged or compensated. It also instructed the claimant sector to
cover the litigation costs. In addition to this, the court also ordered the claimant
sector to pay Rs. 10 lakhs to be used in Bicchri and other nearby areas of
Udaipur District to carry out remedial steps.
Analysis –
The Polluter Pay Principle implemented by the court is very beneficial in
reducing the danger and harm to mother earth. The quantum of payment is
determined, the law of total responsibility and the Polluter Pays principle
enforced, interest is levied on the pay-out amount to ensure that the damage
done is paid for and that it is proportionate to the destruction caused so that the
accused does not end up taking the benefit of his own wrongs.
As for the non-compliance of the Respondents with the court order and the
evasion of responsibility, it should have been dealt with more harshly and well
before the pendency of the case crossed 15 years because the damage caused to
the villagers was too great in magnitude and in need of urgent intervention not
to have been compensated for 15 entire years.
In conclusion, while it is clear that all aspects of the case have been resolved
and directives have been given to redress the injustices and abuses caused, we
can still not claim that justice has been done to the poor villagers who in this
case seem to be the only party genuinely at loss.

Conclusion –
Justice delayed is justice denied, as demonstrated in this case. Remedial actions
from the court were desperately needed by the inhabitants and those in the area.
The problem and the terrible circumstances in which the residents of Bichhri
were living were evident from the evidence and earlier reports.
Despite the Supreme Court’s verdict, there were no measures put in place to
regulate the chemical industry. The respondents, who had significant influence,
filed interim applications and failed to comply with the court’s directives,
therefore, there is a need for a well-crafted legal system that protects victims
from such dominant parties. Therefore, the main objective of the court in
determining compensation should be to ensure that the victim receives fair
compensation for the harm suffered and to deter the polluter from repeating
similar harmful actions in the future.