"Environment includes land, water, and air and the inter-relationship which exists among and

between water, air and land and human beings and other living creatures, plants, micro-organisms
and property." [section 2(a) of EP Act, 1986].

The Constitution of India paved the way for developing for environmental jurisprudence in India.
Constitutional Amendments like 42nd amendment incorporated provisions which would emphasize
upon the duty of the state as well as its citizens to protect the environment.

General Principles of Environmental Law:

1. Sustainable Development:

In India, there has been rapid environmental degradation due to the over exploitation of
natural resources triggered by urbanization, industrialization and population explosion.
There is therefore a great need for protecting the environment and ensuring development in
a sustainable manner. To resolve the problem of environmental degradation, the experts
worldwide have come up with a doctrine called sustainable development, which essentially
advocates harmony between development and environment protection. The concept of
sustainable development is not a new concept. In order to strike a balance between
environment and development, the concept of sustainable development refers to
development that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising on the
needs of our future generations to be able to meet their needs.

2. Precautionary Principle:

Origin of concept: 1992 Earth Summit: Declaration on Environment and Development.

Principle 15, advocating the widespread international application of the precautionary
principle. "In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely
applied by states according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or
irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for
postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation. "The Supreme
Court of India, in Vellore Citizens Forum Case, developed the following three concepts for the
precautionary principle: Environmental measures must anticipate, prevent and attack the
causes of environmental degradation Lack of scientific certainty should not be used as a
reason for postponing measures. Onus of proof is on the actor to show that his action is
benign.

3. Public Trust Doctrine:

M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath and Others: Span Motels Pvt. Ltd. was a private company held by
the owner of Span Resorts, had floated an ambitious project called Span Club. Mr. Kamal
Nath (the then Minister of Environment and Forests) had a direct contact with the owner of
Span Motels. He leased out 27.12 bighas of land to the Company for their project. Due to
this permission given, led to the encroachment of Beas River and due to the pressure from
construction work of the project, the river changed its course which led to washing away of
the adjoining lawns. The Owners used bulldozers and earthmovers which led to a change of
course of the Beas River. This was done to protect the motel from floods due to the river in
future. The Public Trust Doctrine primarily rests on the principle that certain resources like
air, water, sea and the forests have such a great importance to people as a whole that it
would be wholly unjustified to make them a subject of private ownership.
4. Doctrine Of Sustainable Development:

Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of UP: A Public Interest Litigation was filed
under Article 32 for the violation of Article 21. It was the first case of its kind in the country
involving the environmental and ecological balance. The Doon Valley was considered to be
rich in minerals after which extensive mining activities were conducted by the government.
The mines also dug deep into the hillsides, an illegal practice that resulted in cave-ins and
slumping. As a result, the hillsides destroyed the vegetation and landslides killed many
villagers and ruined their homes, cattle, and agricultural lands their only means of livelihood.
The State of Uttar Pradesh failed to regulate mining as required by existing mining laws.
Illegal extension of leases and destructive practices continued and corrupt and ineffective
state practices were conducted in breach of existing mining safety rules. These malpractices
lead the petitioner to file a writ petition before the Supreme Court of India in 1983. In
response, Supreme Court took action and ordered vegetation. In 1988, the Supreme Court
concluded that continued mining destroyed the vegetation and violated Forest Conservation
Act.

5. Principle of Preventive Action:

This principle makes the states dutybound to guarantee that the activities within their
jurisdiction or control do not cause harm to the environment of other state or of areas
beyond the limits of national jurisdiction. The preventive principle is always related to the
‘precautionary principle’ as prevention is also an anticipatory principle that seeks to avoid
foreseeable risks. The prevention principle is the fundamental notion behind laws regulating
the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste and laws
regulating the use of pesticides. The principle was the foundation of the Basel Convention on
the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal (1989),
which sought to minimize the production of hazardous waste and to combat illegal dumping.
The courts in India have, recognised this principle, but precautionary principle has been
primarily relied upon. However, these two principles apply only when the project or activity
has not commenced its operation or commenced its operations but only a possibility of
environmental harm exists, without a proof of actual harm. Polluter-pays Principle applies to
the situation wherein environmental harm has already taken place.

6. Polluter-Pays Principle:

The principle places the responsibility of paying the damages to the persons who should pay
it as well as who have the ability to pay it. The primary function of the Principle is that it
helps in allocating the costs and repairing the damage, between different stakeholders, for
the harm caused by them to the environment. It forms the basis of many key regulatory and
legal concepts like the extended producer responsibility, compensatory afforestation etc. In
Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v Union of India, (2011 (8) SCC 161), the polluter pays
principle was applied for the first time in India. However, it is a principle which is mostly
relied upon by the judiciary for holding the polluter responsible for environmental harm, and
ensuring compensation is paid for the same. However, it's often criticised as a mode of
paying to pollute, by allowing the polluters to pollute the environment and do irreversible
damage, without any culpability, except for polluter’s financial liability.