Continuous Evaluation 1

Marks 20 Marks

Name Shreesha K S

Registration 13B126
No

How to legally ensure Ethical Compliance on Laws / Legal Provisions/Acts?

You choose a law or provision of an Act/ Statute & find out causes of Non-Compliances & suggest
legal & ethical remedial measures.

1. Answer the following 10 questions.

2. Do not change this format.
3. Total Number of words: 4000 words
4. Format: Font Calibri Light, 12, Single Space.
5. Last date submission: August 21
6. Section A students share your softcopy to: palakmnagar@gmail.com
7. Section B students share your softcopy to: thanvi1000@gmail.com
8. DO NOT EMAIL TO ME.

1. Which Act (wholly) or Section(s) of a Statute is taken by you for the study of non-
compliances? State only the bare Title of Act or Section(s). You can take up to 2 Sections.

I have chosen Sections 24 and 25 of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974.
These sections talk of Prohibition on use of stream or well etc. for disposal of polluting
matter and Restrictions on new outlets and new discharges respectively.

2. What is the core essence of Act (Wholly) or Section(s) of a Statute that you have chosen?

As per the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, its core objective as
elucidated in the long title is as follows:

An Act to provide for the prevention and control of water pollution and the maintaining
or restoring of wholesomeness of water for the establishment, with a view to carrying out
the purposes aforesaid, of Boards for the prevention and control of water pollution, for
 conferring on and assigning to such Boards powers and functions relating thereto and for
matters connected therewith.

The core essence of the sections that I have chosen, that is, Sections 24 and 25 are in
furtherance of the same objective, to prevent discharge of effluents to water bodies.

3. State the historical sources of that Act or Section of a Statute that you have chosen.

Since ancient times, water has been considered a property of all, hence, according to old
Hindu traditions, it was the dharma of the ruler to maintain and upkeep the sources of
water for the benefit of all. Under Manu Shastra, Laws imposed a system of social
reprimands of punishments for those who polluted the water.1

In the post-Independence era, Water Jurisprudence took a more dynamic turn.

Environmental Jurisprudence, in general, received an impetus after the Stockholm
Convention, 1972. The speech of our former Prime Minister Smt. Indira Gandhi was well
received at Stockholm, where she gave an insight into the situation of developing
countries keeping up with requirements of the modern world in terms of sustainable
development.

In the Constitution, Water is a matter included in the List II, i.e. State List, under Entry
17. Hence, since Centre has no power to legislate on this matter. However, on consensus
by a majority of states as per Article 252, Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act,
1974, was passed.

4. Where do you find the actual non-compliances? What are the legal causes of non-
compliances of that Act (Wholly) or Section(s) of a Statute?

Issues of non-compliance are innumerable in number. There are simply countless cases
of violation of Sections 24 and 25. Many industries lining the river belts and other water
sources continuously violate these sections by discharging poisonous effluents into river
basins and water sources, untreated. The two landmark judgments in this regard are M C
Mehta v. Union of India (Kanpur Tanneries Case) and Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action
and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. (Bichhri Case).

In the Kanpur Tanneries Case, the Court had held the city municipality, Kanpur Nagar
Mahapalika (Mahapalika), responsible for water pollution. The Mahapalika had a statutory
duty to protect the environment and maintain public cleanliness. The duties and powers
of the Mahapalika and its authorities were set out in Chapter V of the Uttar Pradesh Nagar
Mahapalika Adhiniyam (the Act). Moreover, Central and State Boards appointed under
the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (Water Act) were responsible

1
Philippe Cullet & Joyeeta Gupta, Evolution of Water Law and Policy in India, Joseph W. Dellapenna & Joyeeta Gupta
eds, The Evolution of the Law and Politics of Water (Dordrecht: Springer Academic Publishers, 2009), p. 159.
for the prevention and control of water pollution. The Central Board supervised the State
boards and advised the Central Government. The State Boards were responsible for the
actual water pollution management and control programs, and it had the power to take
emergency measures, including applying to a Magistrate to restrain an entity who is
causing pollution.

In Bicchri Case, the Writ Petition was filed by an NGO on behalf of the people living in the
vicinity of chemical industrial plants located in a Village Bichhri in District Udaipur,
Rajasthan. In year 1987, large amounts of toxic waste was discharged in the form of
effluents by Hindustan Agro Ltd. This continued on a large scale, thereby affecting the
water and soil in the surrounding area. This was clearly in violation of S. 24 of Water Act.
Court issued various directions to remedy the issue and disposed of the writ with costs.

Further, many other leading judgments have been delivered in this regard by the
Supreme Court of India. One such leading judgment is M C Mehta v. Union of India (Taj
Trapezium Case). In the Taj Trapezium Case, senior Environmentalist and Attorney Dr. M
C Mehta filed a writ alleging that the various industries in the Taj Trapezium area (An area
of roughly 10,000 sq. m in a trapezium shape) were seriously harming the cultural and
ecological heritage of the area. The various polluting industries included the Mathura
Refinery, a few Coal Industries, Foundries and a Railway Shunting Yard. This resulted in
the Supreme Court issuing series of orders since 1993, making this writ of the nature of
Continuing Mandamus. The Court has continued to monitor the developments on its
orders till now, based on the recommendations of the Varadarajan Committee given in
1978.

Based on the directions of the Supreme Court, a National Green Tribunal was constituted
to take care of cases in violation of Environmental Law. A few of the latest judgments are,
U.P. Pollution Control Board v. Bhupendra Kumar Modi and Anr. , and the Art of Living case
before the National Green Tribunal.

In the case of U.P. Pollution Control Board, it was found out by the Court that the
Company was violating S. 24 and S. 25 of the Water Act by not treating effluents before
discharging them into a river. The level of toxic substances was substantially higher than
the recommended level. Hence, the Company was liable of having committed an offence
under the Water Act.

The latest case which created a lot of buzz is the Art of Living case, where the foundation
of Sri Sri Ravi Shankar was slapped a fine of Rs. 5 Crore by the National Green Tribunal for
damaging the Yamuna Flood Plains beyond recovery by conducting an International
Conference on the plains. In this case, Sections 24 and 25 were referred to in order to see
whether there was a non-compliance.
5. What are the social causes of non-compliances?

Immediately after Independence, India was in a financially weak position. In order to

consolidate our position in global economy, it was necessary to increase industrial
production, to create more job opportunities. Hence, Environmental concerns took a back
seat in the race to self-sufficiency and increased industrial capabilities. This has led to a
general callous attitude towards keeping up environmental requirements such as not
dumping toxic effluents into water bodies, untreated. It is also easy to not follow
Environmental guidelines and just bribe off officials when they object to these, as it is costly
to adopt sustainable measures and have a zero-waste policy.
Another important reason is an absence of sensitivity towards ecology and environment.
Taking care of our environment, keeping our surroundings safe and clean, always assumes
a second spot to making profits. This lack of sensitivity has greatly hurt the quality of life of
Indians, owing to the fact that a highly polluted environment is responsible for causing
various diseases and disorders.

6. What are the psychological causes of non-compliances?

There are many psychological reasons as to why industrialists/businessmen may resort to

non-compliance of these sections. Impaired empathy always results in individuals
struggling to put themselves in the position of others, thereby failing to understand how
their actions could affect somebody elses lives. By polluting our water bodies, we are
seriously affecting our own lives, as well as the lives of our future generations, but this
sense of impaired empathy almost always results in us not being able to understand the
serious problems we may be causing.
Also, as the world has become more business-friendly, self-centeredness is on the rise.
People care only for themselves, and are not worried about other human beings. People
prioritise their own needs over the needs of others. Sustainable development is a concept
that tries to fight this tendency.
Moreover, people have manipulative tendencies. They tend to manipulate the system for
their own benefit. For example. People release untreated effluents into the river, while
having a permit only to release treated effluents which do not cause any harm to our
ecosystem.
A sense of entitlement also pervades in the society, where one individual feels he is more
special than another, and therefore, deserves special treatment. A few industries have
argued that since they produce chemicals that are very vital for the economy of the
country, they should be allowed to discharge effluents without treating them, as a subsidy.
This kind of gamble cannot be played at any cost.
Also, there is a tendency to blame others for their own mistakes. For example, blaming the
City Corporation for not having provided enough infrastructure while the Company has an
ethical responsibility to take care of infrastructure which helps in effluent treatment and
discharge.
7. What are the economic implications of non-compliances?

The economic implications of not following Section 24 and 25 of Water Act are huge.
Polluting our water sources for a long time have had very disastrous impacts. The process
of rejuvenating or cleaning up of these water sources is, monetarily, a very burdensome
process.
Take the example of our main river, Ganga. Shri Rajiv Gandhi started the Ganga Action
Plan in 1986 amidst much fanfare. Huge amounts of money were spent, was also lost in
corruption, before people could realise that the cleaning up of Ganga is not an easy task.
The present Government under Shri Narendra Modi has also taken a special interest in
cleaning up Ganga, due to the impact it has on the lives of majority of Indians, under the
Namami Gange Mission. Thousands of crores are being spent to clean up Ganga. All this
would not at all have been a problem if there was a moral, ethical compliance of what has
been stated under sections 24 and 25 since time immemorial. It was too late when the law
was made. Even after the law having been made, there has been no strict compliance of
law.
Moving on to the next point, it is indeed possible to monetarily compensate the losses
caused by violation of section 24 and 25, but the question as to how effective the measure
will be, remains to be answered. If monetary compensation is used in the right way, i.e.,
for the rejuvenation of rivers and water bodies, it would be justified. However, it is a well-
known fact that ecosystems are very sensitive, and once damaged, the pristine nature of
such ecosystems cannot be restored. A great example is the recent Art of Living event that
took place in the Yamuna Floodplains. National Green Tribunal held that the Art of Living
event took a toll on Yamuna Floodplains, and to restore it to its former glory, an amount
of Rs. 42 crores have to be spent in minimum. What the NGT is trying to say here is that by
spending 42 crores, we can make an effort to bring back the lost beauty of Yamuna
Floodplains, however, it cannot be said with a hundred-percent surety that Yamuna
Floodplains would return to its former glory even after spending all that money.

8. How do you think State Legislature should address that problem of non-compliance either
by Amendment or new insertion of an Act (Wholly) or Section(s) of a Statute?

State Legislature should pass an Act, effectively closing down operations of all industries in
violation of the sections, till they have an alternate system in place, such as an effluent
treatment system before the discharge into rivers. More power should be prescribed to
the Pollution Control Board in order to control the increase in incidences of violation of the
said law.
Further, amendments to Environment (Protection) Act and National Green Tribunal Act
have been proposed by the NDA Government to provide more teeth and penalise
violations of environmental provisions.
 Following is an excerpt from a blog post2:

In hard line with violators, on the environment ministry has proposed stiff penalties for
substantial environment damage, a minimum fine of 5 crore in a radius of 5-10km
radius counting from outer perimeter of a project, extending to Rs.10 crore and in the
case of continuing damage, entail an addition of Rs.50 lakh per day and imprisonment
of seven years.
In cases where the damage goes beyond a 10 km radius from the project site,15 crore,
counting with Rs.75 lakh per day if substantial environmental damage. The fine can go
up toRs.20 crore and the imprisonment can even extend to a life term in case of serious
violations.
The fine for a minor violation is in the range of1,000-10,000, with an additional penalty
of Rs.5,000 for every day that the violation continues after its detection. A minor
violation is an act of omission or commission by a person causing environmental
damage due to failure of compliance with green laws.
Any violation which can neither be termed minor nor substantial will be construed as
non-substantial damage. In the case of non-substantial damage, the violator will have
to cough up1 lakh, extendable to Rs.5 crore, and pay an additional penalty of Rs.1 lakh
per day of continued damage.

It can be observed that the Government is very interested to prevent future occurrences
of discharge of effluents into river bodies. This is in line with the sustainable development
policy that the Government wishes to undertake. These penal provisions may provide a
sense of deterrence, however, in order to ensure ethical compliance, it is necessary to
sensitize people towards our environment.

9. What is the moral standpoint of non-compliances of Act (Wholly) or Section(s) of a Statute?

Morality is a sense of right and wrong within an individual. It may vary from person to
person. Therefore, what is moral for a person may not necessarily be moral for another
person. One person may believe in discharging the effluents to a river for his own benefit.
While it is definitely not ethical, it is his skewed sense of morality that justifies the discharge
of effluents. He may say that he does not have the necessity to take care of the river, as it
is not harming him in any way. This is why a morality should come from within a person.
For a person to have right sense of morals, his education and sensitization plays a very
important role. If a person is made to believe that he needs to take care of only himself
and not others, that idea becomes his moral value, which is detrimental to the society.
Therefore, a moral compliance of an Act is entirely subjective. It is however possible to
ensure an ethical compliance of an Act by making people understand what is more ethical
of the choices he has.

2
https://blog.ipleaders.in/changes-under-environment-laws-amendment-bill-2015/, last accessed on 23/08/17 at
8:20 PM.
10. What is the ethical standpoint of non-compliances of Act (Wholly) or Section(s) of a Statute?

The acts of humans lead to environmental pollution. The stronger demand for resources
is also a factor that contributes to the problem as we all need food and shelter. When
these things are so desired and need the natural balance of the environment is disturbed.
Engineering developments are resulting in resource depletion and environmental
destruction. There are several environmental issues that have created havoc on our
environment and human life. If ignored today, these ill effects are sure to curb human
existence in the near future. Human beings are considered to be the most intelligent
species living on earth. This could be why it is the only species on earth which has civilized
itself over the decades to a large extent. Today, human beings boast as being superior to
all other animals but what is the use of such great intelligence when environment ethics
are not followed? Industrialization has given way to pollution and ecological imbalance. If
an industry is causing such problem, it is not only the duty of that industry but all the
human being to make up for the losses. But how long an artificial and restored
environment will able to sustain? Will it be able to take the place of the natural resources?
Environmentalists are trying to find answers to these difficult questions and all these
together are termed as environment ethics.

It is the responsibility of all to ensure that environmental ethics are being met. It is
somewhat difficult to make adjustments that are necessary to ensure that you are
following all environmental ethics.

Ethics plays an important role in our society today, and environmental ethics and business
ethics must be considered. This has become more prevalent in todays society.

***