Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 28 (0.29 seconds)The Air (Prevention And Control Of Pollution) Act, 1981
Arjun Gopal vs Union Of India . on 23 October, 2018
In Arjun Gopal & Ors. v. UOI & Ors.2, it was observed
that the residents of NCR faced severe air quality standards
which were worst in the World. It had serious adverse health
impact. Life of citizens in NCR had been brought to virtual
standstill. The Capital was smoked into an environmental
emergency of unseen proportions. It will be appropriate to
extract some observations from the judgment:-
The Water (Prevention And Control Of Pollution) Act, 1974
M.C.Mehta vs Union Of India And Ors on 14 March, 1991
"3. The Tribunal noted the concern arising from such
large scale air pollution which grapples the country in
spite of statutory mechanism under the Air Act,
directions of the CPCB under section 18(1)(b), dated
29.12.2015 and directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
for control of vehicular pollution8, industrial and
construction sector pollution9, power sector
4
Para 66 to 76
5
2019 SCC online SC 322, Para 43-47
6
AIR 2020 (SC) 3471, Para 75
7
(2019) 15 SCC 401
8 Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra, Dehradune and Others Vs State of U.P. Others
(1985) 2 SCC 431, M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (2001) 3 SCC 756, M.C. Mehta v. Union of
India (1998) 6 SCC 63, M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (2002) 4 SCC 356, M.C. Mehta v. Union
of India (1998) 6 SCC 60
9 M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1997) 2 SCC 353, M.C. Mehta v. Union of India and Shriram
Foods and Fertilizer Industries and Anr. (1986) 2 SCC 176, Rural Litigation and Entitlement
Kendra, Dehradun v. State of U.P. (1985) 2SCC 431, Mohd. Haroon Ansari v. District
Collector (2004) 1 SCC 491, Union of India v. Union Carbide Co. (1989) 1 SCC 674, M.C.
Mehta v. Union of India (1992) 3 SCC 256, Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. etc.
The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
Mahendra Singh vs State Of Haryana on 15 November, 2021
11. We may note some relevant observations in earlier order of
this Tribunal in connected matters order dated 03.12.2020, O.A. No.
667/2018, Mahendra Singh vs. State of Haryana & Ors., in
the context of permissibility of Stone Crushers in NCR as follows:-
M.C. Mehta vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 April, 2006
11. Again, in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, (2006) 11
SCC 582, at page 586, it was observed :
Nirmala Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh 40 Wps/432/2017 ... on 18 May, 2018
10. When we refer to these extreme effects, we
are not merely referring to the inconvenience
caused to people, but to abject deprivation of a
range of constitutionally embedded rights that
the residents of NCR ought to have enjoyed.
Needless to state, the grim situation of air quality
adversely affected the right to education, work,
health and ultimately, the right to life of the
citizens, and this Court is constitutionally bound
to address their grave concerns. May we remind
ourselves, that this is not the first time that this
Court was impelled into ensuring clean air for the
citizens of the capital region (see M.C.
Mehta v. Union of India [M.C. Mehta v. Union of
India, (1998) 6 SCC 60] , [M.C. Mehta v. Union of
India, (1998) 9 SCC 589] , M.C. Mehta v. Union of
India [M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, (1998) 8 SCC
648] and M.C. Mehta v. Union of India [M.C.
Mehta v. Union of India, (1998) 8 SCC 206] )."
Misc. Application No. 51 Of 2015 In A.No. ... vs Sebi on 29 January, 2015
In MC Mehta v. UOI & Ors., construction
activity in the catchment area of Badkhal were directed to be
restricted/regulated to the level of Carrying capacity. It was
observed that:-