Summary
In appeals arising from tannery pollution of the River Palar in Vellore District, the Supreme Court held that a polluter's liability under the polluter pays principle is continuing and lasts until the ecological damage is reversed, so payment under the 2001 Loss of Ecology Authority award did not end the tanneries' liability after 1998. It restored the Authority's power to assess post-1998 damage, upheld its 2009 award for left-out claimants, and applying a 'Government Pay Principle' directed the State to pay compensation and recover it from polluters, with extensive remedial directions.
Issues
- Whether the tanneries' liability to compensate for pollution ended with payment of the compensation fixed by the Loss of Ecology Authority's award of 07.03.2001 for 1991-1998, or continues until the ecological damage is reversed.
- Whether the Loss of Ecology Authority could entertain left-out claims for 1991-1998 and pass the further award of 24.08.2009.
- Whether the High Court was right to dismiss the public interest petition for want of particulars of unpaid claimants and to set aside the Authority's order of 05.05.2009 assessing damage after 1998.
- What responsibility the State bears where polluters have not paid and remedial schemes remain unimplemented.
- Whether the delay in the tanners' association's special leave petition, never formally condoned, barred its appeal.
Provisions considered
- Article 21, Constitution of IndiaThe right to life was held to include the right to a healthy, pollution-free environment and clean drinking water, and the polluter pays and precautionary principles were treated as drawing strength from it. (¶¶ 64, 71, 73)
- Sections 24, 25, 26, 43 and 44, Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974Extracted to show that discharging polluting matter is prohibited and industries need the State Board's prior consent; tanneries whose effluent exceeded the 2100 mg/l TDS limit were held to violate Section 24 and could not escape liability by pointing to past payments. (¶¶ 88, 89, 113)
- Sections 3 and 5, Environment (Protection) Act, 1986Read as empowering the Central Government, with the State and its agencies, to determine and recover the cost of remedial measures and oversee their execution, grounding the State's shared responsibility. (¶¶ 76, 82)
- Rule 6, Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986The tanners' objection that sampling did not follow Rule 6 was rejected as an afterthought, since it was not raised before the Authority and it was not disputed that the samples came from the tanneries. (¶ 102)
- Recovery proceedings, Revenue Recovery Act, 1890The State was directed to recover from the polluters, through Revenue Recovery Act proceedings or other lawful means, the compensation it pays to affected families. (¶ 115)
Held
- The polluter pays principle, read with absolute liability, requires polluters to compensate victims and also bear the cost of restoring the environment; remediation is continuous, and a fresh cause of action arises if industries and local bodies fail in their duty. (¶¶ 71, 72, 73, 75, 76)
- The polluter pays principle must not become a licence to pollute on payment; liability does not end when assessed compensation is paid but continues until the pollution is curbed and its effects reversed. Where environmental law or licence conditions are violated in a way that causes or is likely to cause degradation, the deeming fiction of pollution applies and the violator must both compensate and restore. (¶¶ 74, 77, 91.1, 113)
- Polluters bear absolute liability, but the Union and State share responsibility for enforcement and cannot absolve themselves of failure to implement the law. Under the Government Pay Principle the State must pay compensation to affected persons and recover it from the polluters until the damage is reversed. (¶¶ 82, 83, 113)
- Having undertaken before the High Court to consider claims filed after the cut-off date, the Authority could not shrug off that undertaking; its power to identify affected persons carried implied authority to admit genuine new claims, and its lapses could not defeat the rights of left-out residents while pollution continued. The 2009 award, passed after notice and following the earlier methodology, was upheld, and the belated objections on natural justice and Rule 6 sampling were rejected. (¶¶ 101, 102, 103)
- Since the 2001 award itself said liability continued until the ecology was restored, and the industries had not achieved zero liquid discharge or met the TDS standard, the tanneries remained liable after 1998; payment of the Rs. 10,000 pollution fine or the awarded sums did not absolve them, and economic importance gives no right to destroy the ecology. The High Court erred in setting aside the Authority's order of 05.05.2009, which it did by misconstruing the Authority's scope and object. (¶¶ 108, 110, 112, 113)
- The High Court should not have rejected the public interest petition because the appellant gave no details of unpaid claimants; the details were with the District Collector and the Authority, and the High Court should have called for them or directed verification. (¶¶ 105, 106)
- Although no order condoning the 439-day delay in the tanners' association's petition had been passed, the Court condoned it in the larger public interest, as the association had been contesting the connected appeals and the issues were intertwined. (¶ 98)
- The Court observed that the damage in Vellore District could even be categorised as ecocide, and that tanneries are not the only polluters, as untreated municipal sewage and solid waste also reach the river. (¶¶ 92, 112, 114)
Result
High Court order in W.P. Nos. 8335 of 2008 and 19017 of 2009 modified and the committee's appeals disposed of; association's appeal against the order upholding the 24.08.2009 award dismissed. The State must pay unpaid award compensation within six weeks and recover it from polluters, and within four weeks form a committee headed by a retired High Court Judge to decide post-1998 claims, frame a restoration scheme and enforce ZLD; further monitoring, disclosure, sewage, sand-mining and worker-safety directions issued; no costs; listed after four months for compliance.