Ecolex Logo
Le portail au
droit de l'environnement
Résultats de la recherche » Jurisprudence

Indian Council for Enviro-legal Action and others (Petitioners) v. Union of India and others (Respondents)

Pays/Territoire
Inde
Type de cour
Nationale - cour supérieure
Date
Jul 18, 2011
Source
UNEP, InforMEA
Nom du tribunal
Supreme Court of India
Juge
Dattu, H.L.
Bhandari, D.
Langue
Anglais
Sujet
Déchets et substances dangereuses, Eau, Terre et sols, Environnement gén.
Mot clé
Parasites/maladies Déchets dangereux Conservation du sol/amélioration du sol Procédures judiciaires/procédures administratives Pollution du sol/qualité Toxicité/empoisonnement Substances dangereuses Cour/tribunaux Principe pollueur-payeur Responsabilité/indemnisation
Résumé
The petitioner, the Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action brought this action to prohibit and remedy the pollution caused by several chemical industrial plants in Bichhri village, Udaipur District, Rajasthan. The Respondents operated heavy industry plants there, producing chemicals such as oleum (a concentrate form of sulphuric acid), single super phosphate and the highly toxic "H" acid (the manufacture of which is banned in western countries). Respondents operated these plants without permits which caused serious pollution of the environment. Toxic waste water was untreated and left to be absorbed into the earth causing aquafiers and the subterranean supply of water to be polluted. The soil also became polluted and unfit for cultivation. Several people in nearby villages were alleged to have contracted diseases due to the pollution, some of whom had died. From 1989- 1992, the Court issued orders to respondents, directing them to, among other things, control and store the sludge. These orders were largely ignored. In 1994, the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) reported on the pollution caused by respondents, and in 1996, the court held a final hearing on these matters. This judgment directed the closure of the factories attached to the property of the polluter and directed the Ministry of Environment and Forests of India to recover the cost of eco-restoration from the industries held liable. For 15 years, the polluters have pursued legal tactics to delay enforcement of the court’s 1996 judgment. The Court’s recent decision concludes, in part: “This is a very unusual and extraordinary litigation where even after fifteen years of the final judgment of this court the litigation has been deliberately kept alive by filing one interlocutory application or the other in order to avoid compliance of the judgment. The said judgment of this Court has not been permitted to acquire finality till date. This is a classic example how by abuse of the process of law even the final judgment of the apex court can be circumvented for more than a decade and a half". The Supreme Court gave its verdict on the long impending judgment on the Bichhri case, Writ Petition No. 967 of 1989. It imposed a fine of Rs 38.385 crores on Hindustan Agro Chemicals Ltd (HACL) with compound interest since 1997 for the remediation of over 350 hectares of land in Bichhri. The Court also slapped a fine of Rs 10 Lakh on HACL for keeping the litigation alive for almost 15 years even though the court had disposed the petition in 1997, imposing Polluter Pays Principle according to which polluter must pay for the damage done to the human beings and environment.
Texte intégral
COU-159225.pdf