BASIC FACTS:-

&n %;< by the name of Vellore 9itizens elfare Forum 4led a petition = a >ublic 3nterest
6itigation ?>36@ = under &rticle 0- of the 9onstitution of 3ndia !hich guarantees the ‘ight to mo5e the
Supreme 9ourt by appropriate proceedings for the enforcements of rights conferred by the constitution.
The petition !as directed against the pollution !hich !as caused due to discharge of enormous amounts
of untreated eAuents by tanneries and other industries in the state of Tamil %adu, !hich led to the main
source of potable !ater for consumption and irrigation, the >alar ri5er, being polluted, and !hich
conseBuently led to non$a5ailability of clean !ater. & report !hich !as submitted to the Supreme 9ourt
noted that /1C chemicals !ere found in the tannery eAuents and that nearly 02, hectares of land
around the tannery belt and especially in some 2D 5illages in the districts of Vellore, Thiru5anthapur and
‘anipat had been made un4t for culti5ation. 3t !as found that 02 out of EC1 !ells in the area !ere un4t
for consumption or irrigation. 3t also noted the non$compliance by the tanneries regarding
the ;o5ernment order to put up 9ommon *Auent Treatment

M.C. Mehta v. Kama

l Nath and ors.
3n the abo5e judgement,
the petition !as 4led, !herei
n the legality of constructi
on !or by a (otel 9hain ?
Span (otels@ !asBuestio
ned. 3n this case, the be
nch applied the
‘precautionary principle’
and the
‘polluter pays principle’
as eGpounded by thecour
t in the
Vellore Tanneries
case, and ordered the guil
ty party to pay damages a
nd 4nes for the restoration
 ofen5ironmental damage.
The court also noted that
7The aesthetic use and th
e pristine glory of the natu
ral resources, theen5iron
ment and the ecosystems
of our country cannot be p
ermitted to be eroded for
pri5ate, commercial or an
y other use.
A.P. Pollution Cont
rol Board v. Prof. M.
V. Nayadu (Retd.) a
nd ors.
The court in this case re
lied upon the 7precaution
ary principle8, and clari4
ed the rather ambiguous
de4nition from the
VelloreTanneries
9ase, and referred to scie
nti4c uncertainty as the ba
sis for the precautionary p
rinciple.
Bombay Cotton Mill
s Case
3n this case, the court reli
ed on the principle of sust
ainable de5elopment as
mentioned in
Vellore Tanneries
case and held thata bala
nce should be struc bet
!een the ecology and de5
elopment, in 5ie! of publi
c interest.
Narmada Bachao A
ndolan v. nion of !
ndia and "rs.
3n the abo5e judgement,
it !as held that the constru
ction of a dam on the %ar
mada 'i5er !ould not ha5e
dire en5ironmentalconseB
uences, and hence the 7p
recautionary principle8 in t
his case !ould not apply. +
ence, !e can see that the c
oncept of sustainable de5
elopment has considerabl
y e5ol5ed, since it !as 4rst
eGpounded in the
Vellore Tanneries
case