Abstract
Environmental protection is the responsibility of every individual, if degraded by one it will affect the society as a whole. The legal framework operates on the ‘Public Trust Doctrine’ means Government acts as the trustee for protecting and improving the natural resources on behalf of its fellow individuals[1]. Also it’s the duty of the industrial establishments to discharge only the treated effluents. There are various penalties and punishments introduced to limit the degradation of atmosphere. Also there are a number of laws and courts established to restrict this degradation. However, whether all these measures are sufficient to protect our environment? This is the central issue discussed in the present Article. This Article adopts a legal research methodology. It analyses constitutional provisions, government reports, judicial precedents and comparative legal developments relating to river conservation.
Introduction
The environment is defined as the surroundings of natural, physical and biological conditions including humans, biodiversity and ecology[2]. While Pollution refers tothe presence of unwanted pollutant (solid, liquid or gaseous substance presence in the atmosphere) in the environment[3].
Environment protection is not a new concern but is deeply rooted in the history. In the archaeological survey of Indus Valley Civilization, there existed a well-developed sewage system along with the roads and tunnel. During the Roman era there were restriction on cutting down the Olive trees because they provide a wide shadow and can survive on less water. All this shows the early humans awareness regarding protection of environmental protection.
The major environmental degradation began with the Industrial Revolution in late 18th century where due to lack of awareness and focus, the nation states exploited the natural resources which resulted in air, water, land and wildlife degradation. It received global recognition by following the identification of Ozone layer depletion in 1985[4] which forced the global leaders to concern on the issue.
[1]M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath, (1997) 1 S.C.C. 388 (India).
[2] The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, Act no. of 1974, India Code (1974).
[3] The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, Act no. 14 of 1981, India Code (1986).
[4]Montreal Protocol, 1987