Justice Khanwilkar orally stated Tuesday that the environment must prevail over all other rights
Justice Khanwilkar orally stated Tuesday that the environment must prevail over all other rights
In the span of four days, the Supreme Court expressed divergent views about whether preservation of the natural environment should be allowed to take precedence over other rights.
Justice Indira Banerjee ruled that industrial units, which provide livelihood for many thousands of workers and contribute to the nation’s economy, should not be closed down because they have not received prior environmental clearance. The case concerned a Haryana unit with 8,000 employees that had not been granted environmental clearance.
Justice Banerjee stated that the absence of prior environmental clearance was a “procedural error”. “The court cannot be blind to the economy or the need for protection of the livelihood of hundreds and others employed in this project and those dependent on it, if such projects comply to environmental norms,” he stated.
Forest cover resurgence
Justice Khanwilkar, however, led the bench that voted Tuesday in favour of the environment. Justice Khanwilkar stated orally that the environment must prevail over all other rights. The courts’ constant monitoring was what had led to a resurgence in forest cover. Forests must be protected. Forest must be preserved. He stated that it is only due to the strict interpretation and exposition of this court that the forest coverage is increasing.
Through public interest litigation pleas, the Supreme Court has been at the heart of the development of environmental law in the nation. Its rulings have interconnected the survival of mankind and the survival environment by holding that the rights to life include the right to a healthy environment. It raised awareness among the public, legislature, and executive by pointing out that clean air was an attribute of a dignified lifestyle.
In its verdicts, the court has adopted principles of international law. These principles include intergenerational equity, by which the State has an obligation to preserve the environment for future generations.
The polluter pays principle again, which requires that the polluter not just pay the victims of pollution but also be liable for any damage to the environment.
The court introduced the public trust doctrine to prove that the State was a trustee who kept the wealth safe for its ultimate beneficiary the public. The principle of sustainable growth is a crucial check against uncontrolled expansion.
