In Certain constitutional provisions which give certain power and rights to the citizens to protect environment.
The 42nd amendment introduced Article 48A, part of the Directive Principles of State which read, “The State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country.” Article 51A (g), part of the Fundamental Duties read, “It shall be the duty of every citizen of India… to protect and improve the natural environment.[1]
Article 48A: This Article comes under the Directive principle of the State policy. This article implies that State shall endeavour to protect the environment. It also emphasizes on safeguarding the forests and wildlife of the country. Article 48A imposes a duty on State to protect the environment from pollution by adopting various measures.
Article 51A (g): The Article 51 A(g) states that it shall be the duty of each and every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural environment that includes lakes, rivers, forests, and wildlife. This Article also focuses on showing compassion for living creatures. This article is similar to Article 48A, but the only difference is that it concentrates on fundamental duty of citizens whereas Article 48A instructs the state to perform their duties and protect environment. Hence, it is our duty to not only protect the environment from pollution but also improve its quality.
Nagrik Chetna Manch vs The State Government of Maharashtra and Ors on 15 January 2016
The petitioner filed the t PIL for challenging the decision of the Pune Municipal Corporation to construct a road through hills which have been successfully afforested by the Social Forestation Department of the State Government. A resolution was passed by the General Body of Pune Municipal Corporation on 27th February 1996 for construction of a 60 feet wide road through the hills/hills slope from Paud Phata Road up to the gate of Balbharti building complex. It is pointed out in the petition that in the draft revised Development Plan for the city of Pune, which was published in the year 1982, the proposed road was shown. However, while sanctioning the draft Development Plan, in exercise of the power under section 31 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act,1966, the State Government did not grant approval to the said proposed road shown in the draft revised Development Plan.
The hills are regularly visited by hundreds of people for walk in every morning and evening, being lush green having a large number of trees. The contention in the petition is that without carrying out the basic investigation and survey, the Municipal Corporation has thoughtlessly proposed to construct the said road. And due to road construction more than 1000 grown up trees will have to be cut. Area may not have been declared as a forest, but it continues to be a forest which needs to be preserved. It is urged that the power under section 205 of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act,1949 (for short the `MMC Act’) cannot be used to defeat the provisions of the section 31 of the MRTP Act.
The Apex Court said it will be necessary to make a reference to the directive principles of the State Policy incorporated in the part IV of the Constitution of India, Article 48A; court of law cannot enforce the directive principles of the State Policy, nevertheless, they are fundamental in governance. Apart from Article 48A of Chapter IV, the fundamental duties have been incorporated in the form of Article 51A (g). The word `Forest’ under Article 48A and clause (g) of Article 51A cannot be restricted to a forest within the meaning of Indian Forest Act, 1927 or the Forest Conservation Act,1980. Such a narrow meaning will defeat the very object of both the provisions. The forest within the meaning of the said Articles must include a man-made forest. Therefore, the endeavour of the Municipal Corporation should be to save and protect the man-made forest.
We find that even the mandatory duty under clause 1b of sub-section (1) of the section 63 of the MMC Act is not brought to the notice of the General Body before passing the impugned resolution. Thus, the decision-making process has been vitiated by non-consideration of the relevant factors. Apart from the non-consideration of the mandatory duty under the MMC Act, the Corporation seems to be ignorant of the provisions of Article 48A and Clause (g) of Article 51A. The Constitutional mandate has not been considered by the Corporation.[2]
[1] https://www.news18.com/news/india/1976-introduced-the-environment-to-the-indian-constitution-set-stage-for-protection-laws-1642757.html
[2] https://indiankanoon.org/doc/146553368/
Aishwarya Says:
I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.
If you are interested in participating in the same, do let me know.
Do follow me on Facebook, Twitter Youtube and Instagram.
The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.
If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at adv.aishwaryasandeep@gmail.com
We also have a Facebook Group Restarter Moms for Mothers or Women who would like to rejoin their careers post a career break or women who are enterpreneurs.
We are also running a series Inspirational Women from January 2021 to March 31,2021, featuring around 1000 stories about Indian Women, who changed the world. #choosetochallenge