Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

To adjudicate the issue involved in the present case, the Court would necessarily have to consider the compelling demand of protecting the ecology and green cover on one hand and the need for development on the other, in the light of provisions of the Act, 1985.
The concept of right to life, personal liberty and procedure established by law contained in Article 21 of the Constitution of India after the period of inertia, found a new meaning to the Constitution and the petition and culminating in a landmark decision in Menka Gandhi vs union of India AIR 1978 SC 597, by the Supreme Court held that the right to life and personal liberty, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India can be infringed only by a just, fair and reasonable procedure. Due to the new dimension of right to life extended to right to health and other hygienic conditions, in the case of the Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra vs State of Uttar Pradesh, 1986 SCC Supl(1) 517, which in fact, is the first case where the Apex Court made an attempt to look into this question. It ordered the closure of mining operations in certain areas, though in certain other areas it allowed them to be phased out in due course. Notably, the court considered the hardship caused to the lessees, but was of the view that it is the pious that has to be paid for protecting and safeguarding the right of the people who live in the environment with minimum disturbance to ecological balance The right to humane and healthy environment has been indirectly approved in the MC Mehta Environmental Foundattion of cases decided in the 80s. New impetus meaning and value system has to be given to sub-clause 7 of Article 51(A) of the Constitution of India which provides for protection and improvement of natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife and to have compassion for living creatures. As stated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the right to life in and in Article 21 of the Constitution of India does not fall short of the requirement of quality of life which is possible only in an environment of quality where, on account of human agencies, the quality of air and quality of environment are threatened or affected, the courts would not hesitate to use its innovative power to enforce and safeguard the right to life and promote public interest. The administrative agencies cannot be permitted to function in a manner as to make inroads into fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The right to life is much more than the right to animal existence and its attributes are manifold, as life itself. A prioritisation of human needs and the new value system has been recognised in these areas. The right to Sweetwater and right to free air, our attributes of right to life, for, these are basic elements which sustained life itself.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court for the first time in the case of Chhetriya Pardushan Mukti Sangarsh Samiti vs State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1990 SC 2060, observed that every citizen has a fundamental right to have enjoyment of quality of life and living as contemplated in article 21 of the Constitution of India.
In the case of Bangalore Medical Trust vs B.S.Mudappa AIR1991 SC 1902 the Hon'ble Supreme Court was dealing with the question as to whether an open space laid down as such in a development scheme could be leased out for a private nursing home. Justice Thommen answered the question in negative. Once appropriated or earmarked as open space or for building purposes or other development as part of the scheme adopted by local authority like the Bangalore development authority the land should be used for that purpose. If it is to be used for any other purpose, the scheme itself should be ordered in the manner in which, by law, the authority as a corporate body is competent to order. It may be that the aforesaid case did not categorically laid on the right to environment is a part of right to life, but endorse the position that open spaces being the lung space for urban sprawl, is an essential ingredient of development scheme. In case the development authority, after observing the statutory formalities and procedures such as the participating excises and deliberations and application of mind, and what open space into hospital site, the said action may still be invalid. Observance of statutory procedure shall not make an action valid if the action otherwise violate fundamental rights.
"23. .........
24. Protection of the environment, open spaces for recreation and fresh air, playgrounds for children, promenade for the residents, and other conveniences or amenities are matters of great public concern and of vital interest to be taken care of in a development scheme. It is that public interest which is sought to be promoted by the Act by establishing the BDA. The public interest in the reservation and preservation of open spaces for parks and playgrounds cannot be sacrificed by leasing or selling such sites to private persons for conversion to some other user. Any such act would be contrary to the legislative intent and inconsistent with the statutory requirements. Furthermore, it would be in direct conflict with the constitutional mandate to ensure that any State action is inspired by the basic values of individual freedom and dignity and addressed to the attainment of a quality of life which makes the guaranteed rights a reality for all the citizens.

Another major development of the 20th century has been the right of healthy environment has got entrenched in article 21 of the Constitution of India. Courts in a large measure relied upon this right in addressing the variety of aspects relating to protection and improvement of environment. This court in the case of S.K.Garg vs state of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1999 All 41 held that the right to water is part of right of life guarantee of article 21. It has also been held that article 21 of the Constitution of the right to live a decent life, good and management and maintenance of ecology must be held to have primacy over the statutory rights to hold and the property.