• PAGE ONE
• INDEX
• HOME

Access to drinking water is fundamental right, says SC -- No polluting unit within 10 km of lakes, AP told

Our Legal Correspondent

NEW DELHI, Dec. 8

IN a significant judgment, the Supreme Court has held that the right to access to drinking water is fundamental to life and there is a duty cast on the State under Article 21 of the Constitution to provide clean drinking water to its citizens.

``Drinking water is of primary importance in any country. In fact, India is a party to the resolution of the United Nations, passed during the UN Water Conference in 1977,'' the Court observed.

The ruling was handed down by a Division Bench comprising Mr Justice M.J. Rao and Mr Justice M.B. Shah, while allowing three appeals against a judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court and an order of the appellate authority under Section 28 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974.

By the impugned judgment dated May 1, 1998, the high court had upheld the order of the appellate authority, directing the AP Pollution Control Board to issue a `no objection certificate' (NOC) to Surana Oil Mills and Derivatives (India) Ltd to set up its `highly polluting' unit in the vicinity of the Osman Sagar and Himayat Sagar reservoirs. The two reservoirs cater to the needs of over 80 lakh people in the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad.

The High Court had directed issuing of the NOC, while disposing of three public interest petitions by the Society for Preservations of Environment and Quality of Life (SPEQL), Prof. M.V. Nayudu (Retd) and others seeking quashing of the order of the appel late authority dated January 5, 1998, and writ petition by the respondent-industry, seeking a mandamus against the appellant board for grant of the NOC.

The apex court also quashed an order of the Andhra Pradesh Government dated July 3, 1997, granting exemption to the respondent-industry to set up its plant within 10 km of the reservoirs.

``This is a pre-eminently fit case which requires grant of an injunction to prevent irreversible pollution by discharge of `nickel' catalyst and other pollutants to be generated by the industry which may find their way into the twin lakes either directl y or indirectly. Even solid waste such as activated carbon bleaching earth and sodium sulphate might find entry during rainy season from the storage yard resulting in pollution to the lakes, the judges noted.

Grant of exemption to such an industry, the Court said, must be held without any statutory backing and also wholly arbitrary and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution.

Going by the scientific material obtained by the National Environmental Appellant Authority, the Department of Chemical Technology, Bombay University, and the National Geographical Research Institute, Hyderabad, the court said, ``this is certainly not a fit case for directing grant of NOC by the appellant board''.

``It is not possible to hold that the safeguards suggested by the appellant board pursuant to the direction of the State Government dated July 3, 1997, will be adequate in the light of the reports of the three highly reputed organisation. We, therefore, hold that in the facts of this case, the board could not be directed to suggest safeguards and there is every likelihood that the safeguards could fail either due to accident as stated in the reports or due to human error'', the judges observed.

The judges said that since most of the statutes dealing with the environment were by Parliament, we would think that the Law Commission could consider the question of review of the environmental laws and the need for constituting environmental courts wit h experts in addition to judicial members, in the light of experience in other countries.

The Court also directed the State Government to identify polluting industries within 10 km radius of the two lakes and take action in consultation with the AP Pollution Control Board to prevent pollution to the drinking water in the twin reservoirs.

``The State Government shall not permit any polluting industries within the 10 km radius. A report shall be submitted to this court by the State in this behalf within four months in regard to the pollution or polluting potential of industries, if any, ex isting with 10 km of the lakes. After the report is received, the matter may be listed again, the judges directed in their 40-page judgment.