Citation: M. C. Mehta v. Union of India, (1997) 2 SCC 353

Bench: Justice Kuldip Singh and Justice Faizan Uddin

Introduction
The Taj Mahal, an ivory-white marble mausoleum, stands as one of the most priceless national monuments and a glorious tribute to architecture and engineering. Built by Mughal emperor Shah Jahan in memory of his wife Mumtaz Mahal, it resides within the 10,400 sq km trapezium-shaped region known as the Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ), covering five districts within the Agra region of Uttar Pradesh, India. The Taj Mahal, Agra Fort, and Fatehpur Sikri are UNESCO World Heritage sites within this zone. However, the Taj Mahal faced significant deterioration due to atmospheric pollution, leading the World Monuments Fund in 1996 to include it in a list of 100 most endangered sites.

M.C. Mehta, an environmentalist and public interest attorney, observed the white marble of the Taj Mahal turning yellow during his visit in 1984. He filed a public interest litigation before the Supreme Court, highlighting the degradation of the Taj Mahal due to atmospheric pollution and seeking appropriate directives to stop air pollution in the TTZ and save the monument.

Facts
The Taj Mahal case, also known as the Taj Trapezium Case (TTZ), was initiated by M.C. Mehta in 1985 against the Union of India & Ors. Mehta, known as the 'Green Lawyer of India,' targeted the polluting industries around the Taj Mahal. The white marble of the Taj Mahal had turned yellow due to pollution and acid rain, primarily caused by pollutants like sulfur dioxide. The petition aimed to address the rising pollution threatening the Taj Mahal's preservation.

Issues:

• Whether the Taj Trapezium Zone was significantly harmed by pollution affecting the Taj Mahal and its surroundings.
• Whether the usage of coke/coal as industrial fuel by industries in the TTZ was the cause of the deteriorating conditions of the Taj Mahal and the residents of the area.
• Whether government authorities were taking adequate measures to control pollution and protect this iconic monument.
• What legal actions should be taken to mitigate pollution and ensure the long-term preservation of the Taj Mahal.

Arguments from the Plaintiff's Side
M.C. Mehta argued that hazardous chemical industries, brick factories, rubber and lime processing units, and iron foundries around the Taj Mahal were major sources of damage. Reports, including those from the Central Pollution Control Board, identified the Mathura refinery and Firozabad Glass Industry as distant contributors. Mehta suggested an alternative pipeline route from Auria or Babrala to Mathura to serve industries in Firozabad and Agra, instead of the proposed route from Bijapur to Dadri via Mathura.

Reports Examined by the Supreme Court

• Central Board for the Prevention and Control of Water Pollution Report: Identified various industrial activities in Agra, emphasizing their impact on air quality around the Taj Mahal.
• U.P. Pollution Control Board Action: Highlighted the prevalence of polluting industries and non-compliance, leading to closures until pollution control devices were installed.
• NEERI Report and Recommendations: Examined the decay mechanism of the Taj Mahal's marble due to pollutants, particularly sulfur dioxide, and recommended measures like the use of natural gas and the creation of a green belt around the refinery.
• Supreme Court's Examination and Government Actions: Endorsed NEERI's recommendations, including potential relocation of polluting industries outside the TTZ and the implementation of a Green Belt development plan around the Taj Mahal.
• Varadharajan Committee Recommendations: Expressed concern about pollution levels in Agra and recommended preventing new industries from causing pollution northwest of the Taj Mahal.

Arguments from the Defendants' Side
Senior Counsel Mr. Venugopal represented the Uttar Pradesh State Industrial Development Corporation (UPSIDC) and agreed to relocate industries outside the TTZ. Counsel Mr. Kapil Sibal and Mr. Sanjay Parekh, representing most industries, stated that industries were taking steps to approach the Gas Authority of India Limited (GAIL) for gas connections and would accept gas as an industrial fuel.

Holdings
The Supreme Court, after examining all reports and materials, held that industries in the TTZ were active contributors to air pollution in the area. The Court endorsed NEERI's and Varadharajan Committee's recommendations for relocating industries and mitigating pollution effects.

Reasoning:
The Court applied several environmental law principles:

• Sustainable Development: Balancing development with environmental protection.
• Precautionary Principle: Anticipating environmental harm and taking measures to avoid it.
• Polluter Pays Principle: Holding polluters absolutely liable for environmental degradation.

The Court also referenced constitutional provisions, including Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty), Article 47 (duty of the state to improve public health), Article 48A (state's duty to protect the environment), and Article 51A(g) (citizens' duty to protect the environment).

Judgment
Delivered on December 30, 1996, by a Division Bench comprising Justice Kuldip Singh and Justice Faizan Uddin, the judgment directed 292 polluting industries (out of 510) to switch to natural gas as industrial fuel within a fixed schedule, failing which they must stop functioning by December 31, 1997. Industries using coal and coke as industrial fuel in the TTZ were to relocate outside the TTZ, with assistance from the Uttar Pradesh government. The Court emphasized the need for a comprehensive plan to protect the Taj Mahal and its environment, balancing industrial interests and environmental conservation.

Conclusion
The case recognized the environmental damage around the Taj Mahal and created awareness to prevent such damage and take requisite measures against environmental degradation. The judgment highlighted the importance of protecting national heritages from pollution, applying principles of sustainable development, the precautionary principle, and the polluter pays principle. It marked a significant step in environmental jurisprudence, ensuring the long-term preservation of the Taj Mahal.