Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v UOI AIR 1996 SC 2718

This was a petition against pollution which was caused by the discharge of untreated effluent by tanneries and other
industries into agricultural fields, road sides, waterways and open lands, and into the river Palar which is the source
of water supply to the residents of the area. According to the petitioner the entire surface and sub-soil water of river
Palar had been polluted resulting in non availability of potable water to the residents of the area. It was stated that
the tanneries in question had caused environmental degradation in the area. According to the preliminary survey
nearly 35,000 hectares of agricultural land in the Tanneries Belt, had become either partially or totally unfit for
cultivation. There was evidence that the tanneries and other industries had been exhorted for ten years to control
pollution but to no avail. The court ordered the central Government to constitute an authority and confer on it all
powers necessary to deal with the situation. The authority was to implement the precautionary principle and the
“polluter pays” principle. It would also identify the families who had suffered from the pollution and access
compensation and the amount to be paid by the polluters to reverse the ecological damage. The court required the
Madras High Court to monitor the implementation of its orders through a special bench to be constituted and called
a “Green Bench”.

ISSUES

The question which arose for consideration before the Supreme Court was

whether the tanneries should be allowed to continue to operate at the cost of lives of lakhs of people.

PETITIONER ’S ARGUMENTS

It was submitted by petitioner the entire surface and sub-soil water of river Palar has been polluted resulting in non-
availability of potable water to the residents of the area. It is stated that the tanneries in the State of Tamil Nadu have
caused environmental degradation in the area.

An independent survey conducted by Peace Members, a non-governmental organisation, covering 13 villages of

Dindigal and Peddiar Chatram Anchayat Unions, reveals that 350well out of total of 467 used for drinking and
irrigation purposes have been polluted. Women and children have to walk miles to get drinking water.

RESPONDENT’S ARGUMENTS

Learned counsel for the tanneries raised an objection that the standard regarding total dissolved solids (TDS) fixed
by the Board was not justified. This Court by the order dated April 9, 1996 directed the NEERI to examine this
aspect and give its opinion. In its report dated June 11, 1996 NEERI has justified the standards stipulated by the
Board.The Ministry of Environment and forests (MEF) has not categorically laid down standards for inland surface
water discharge for total dissolved solids (TDS), sulphates and chlorides. The decision on these standards rests with
the respective State Pollution Control Boards as per the requirements based on local site conditions. The standards
stipulated by the TNPCB are justified on the afore referred considerations. The prescribed standards of the TNPCB
for inland surface water discharge can be met for tannery waste waters cost-effectively through proper implant
control measures in tanning operation, and rationally designed and effectively operated wastewater treatment
plants(ETPs & CETPs).

JUDGEMENT

Pursuant to this Court’s Order dated April 9, 1996 we have heard learned counsel appearing for the tanneries which
have been closed in terms of the above order. It has been brought to our notice that there are some tanneries which
had set up individual pollution control devices, but despite that they were closed. It has further been brought
to our notice that some of the tanneries are connected with CETP’s and have also set up their individual pollution
control devices. Various other anomalies have been brought to our notice. Be that as it may, we have now to adopt a
uniform procedure to bring these tanneries on rails. We make it clear that

No tannery shall be permitted to re-open unless this Court is satisfies that the necessary pollution control devices
either individually or cumulatively have been set up by these tanneries and for that purpose we have to depend on
the advice tendered by Technical Authorities like the Pollution Control Boards or NEERI. The Court directed the
Central Pollution Control Board and the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board to jointly inspect the area on war-
footing. The tanneries either directly or through learned counsel may approach the Pollution Control Boards or
indicate that their respective units have set up/constructed the necessary pollution Control devices. We direct the
Pollution Control Boards concerned to immediately inspect the Units and file a report in this respect before May 6,
1996.The Court further directed that all those Units which are not in a position to construct the effluent treatment
devices within this period may approach the Board as and when they complete the devices. The North Arcot District
and Chengai MGR District Association and other Associations of the Tanners shall bear the expenses of the
inspection teams organized by the Boards.

 The Supreme Court examining the report delivered its judgment making all efforts to maintain a harmony
between environment and development.
 The Court admitted that these Tanneries in India are the major foreign exchange earner and also provides
employment to several thousands of people. But at the same time, it destroys the environment and poses a
health hazard to everyone.
 The court delivering its judgment in favor of petitioners directed all the Tanneries to deposit a sum of Rs.
10,000 as fine in the office of Collector as fine
 The Court further directed the State of Tamil Nadu to award Mr. M. C. Mehta with a sum of Rs. 50,000 as
appreciation towards his efforts for protection of Environment.
 The court in this case also emphasized on the Constitution of Green Bench dealing specifically with matters
relating to environment protection and also for speedy and expeditious disposal of environmental cases.

In my opinion it is obvious that the Environment Act contains useful provisions for controlling pollution. I believe
that the main purpose of the Act is to create an authority or authorities under Section 3(3) of the Act with adequate
powers to control pollution
and protect the environment. It is a pity that till date no authority has been constituted by theCentral Government.
The work which is required to be done by an authority in terms of Section 3(3) read with other provisions of the Act
is being done by this Court and the other Courts in the country.

It is high time that the Central Government realises its responsibility and statutory duty to protect the degrading
environment in the country.

If the conditions in the five districts of Tamil Nadu, where tanneries are operating, are permitted to continue then
in the near future all rivers/canals shall be polluted, underground waters contaminated, agricultural lands turned
barren and the residents of the area exposed to serious diseases. It is, therefore, necessary for this Court to direct the
Central Government to take immediate action under the provisions of the Environment Act. The Constitutional and
statutory provisions protect a person’s right to fresh air, clean water and pollution free environment, but the source
of the right is the inalienable common law right of clean environment. There are more than 900 tanneries operating
in the five districts of Tamil Nadu. Some of them may, by now, have installed the necessary pollution control
measures, they have been polluting the environment for over a decade and in some cases even for a longer period.

This Court has in various orders indicated that these tanneries are liable to pay pollution fine.The polluters must
compensate the affected persons and also pay the cost of restoring the damaged ecology.