Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981

54 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

M.C.MEHTAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 153430 December 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ petition filed by environmental activist M.C. Mehta alleging that emissions from coke/coal‑using industries in the Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ) were causing severe atmospheric pollution and damaging the Taj Mahal. Expert reports (NEERI, Varadharajan Committee) establishe

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusKENNETH BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS LTD. & ORS.

2016 INSC 45829 June 2016Dismissed

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) auctioned a 14.3‑hectare parcel of land for residential development on an "as is where is" basis, and Kenneth Builders & Developers Ltd. (the builder) paid the full bid amount and obtained possession. The development agreement required the builder to secure all statutory clearances

AKHIL SHARAT GOSEWA SANGHversusSTATE OF A.P. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 18629 March 2006

The Supreme Court examined a series of appeals challenging the grant of an industrial licence to Al‑Kabeer Exports Ltd. for a mechanised slaughter‑house in Medak district, Andhra Pradesh. The petitioners argued that the licence violated location prohibitions, environmental standards, the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition of C

VEDANTA LIMITEDversusTHE STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS

2024 INSC 17529 February 2024Dismissed

Vedanta Limited operates a copper smelter at the SIPCOT industrial complex in Thoothukudi, Tamil Nadu. The Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board and the State Government ordered its closure for repeated violations of environmental norms, including operating without consent, improper hazardous waste management, and dumping

VELLORE CITIZENS WELFARE FORUMversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 95228 August 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ under Article 32 filed by the Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum alleging that tanneries in five districts of Tamil Nadu were discharging untreated effluents, contaminating surface and groundwater, rendering 35,000 hectares of agricultural land unfit for cultivation and

M.C.MEITTAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2001 INSC 17026 March 2001Modified

The Supreme Court, hearing M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, examined the failure of the Delhi government and private bus operators to meet its earlier order (28 July 1998) that the entire city bus fleet be converted to CNG by 31 March 2001 and that no bus older than eight years operate on diesel after 1 April 2000. Applic

AKHIL BHARAT GOSEVA SANGH ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS.

1994 INSC 48925 October 1994Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined the controversy surrounding the establishment of a mechanised slaughter house (Alkabeer Abattoir) at Rudraram, Medak district, Andhra Pradesh. The petitioner organisations challenged the various permissions granted to the company, arguing that the slaughter house would deplete cattle wealth a

ARJUN GOPAL AND OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2018 INSC 98123 October 2018Directions issued

The petitioners, three infants represented by their fathers, sought a ban on firecrackers and related explosives in Delhi/NCR, alleging severe health hazards from air pollution, especially during Diwali. The Court examined the constitutional balance between the right to health (Art.21) and the commercial (Art.19(1)(g))

D. SWAMYversusKARNATAKA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD AND ORS

2022 INSC 99822 September 2022Dismissed

The appellant, D. Swamy, challenged the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board's (KSPCB) consent to operate a Common Bio‑Medical Waste Treatment Facility (CBMWTF) on the ground that the facility lacked prior environmental clearance (EC) under the 2006 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification as amended. The

TECHI TAGI TARAversusRAJENDRA SINGH BHANDARI & ORS.

2017 INSC 98622 September 2017Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined an appeal against an order of the National Green Tribunal (NGT) that directed State Governments to reconsider the appointments of chairpersons and members of State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) and to lay down guidelines for such appointments. The Court held that under the National Green T

GULF GOANS HOTELS CO. LTD. & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2014 INSC 65622 September 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of hotels and beach resorts in Goa, challenged demolition orders based on a series of government "guidelines" that prohibited construction within 500 metres of the high tide line. The Supreme Court examined whether these guidelines, issued between 1981 and 1986, qualified as law enforceable under

BODDU NARAYANAMMAversusSRI VENKATARAMA ALUMINIUM CO. AND ORS.

1999 INSC 42921 September 1999Appeal(s) allowed

Boddu Narayanamma, the landlady, sought eviction of Sri Venkatarama Aluminium Co. and its partners who occupied a building in Rajahmundry under a composite lease containing both residential and non‑residential portions. The Rent Controller dismissed the petition, holding the landlord's requirement was not bona fide and

M K RANJITSINH & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2024 INSC 28021 March 2024Directions issued

The petitioners sought a blanket prohibition on the installation of overhead transmission lines for solar power across roughly 99,000 square kilometres in Rajasthan and Gujarat, arguing that such lines threaten the critically endangered Great Indian Bustard (GIB). The Supreme Court had earlier ordered the conversion of

M.C. MEHTA AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

1986 INSC 28120 December 1986Disposed off

The petitioners filed a writ under Article 32 seeking the closure of Shriram Foods & Fertilizers' hazardous units. During the proceedings oleum gas escaped, prompting the Delhi Legal Aid Board and Delhi Bar Association to file applications for compensation on behalf of victims. The Court examined the scope of Article 3

DR. BALRAM SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2023 INSC 95020 October 2023Directions issued

Dr. Balram Singh filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking the full implementation of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 and the Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition) Act, 1993. The Court examined whether the statutes requi

ANIRUDH KUMARversusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS.

2015 INSC 24220 March 2015Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a resident of a building in Hauz Khas, challenged the Municipal Corporation of Delhi’s issuance of a Regularisation Certificate that allowed the owners of a pathological laboratory to operate on multiple floors of the residential building. The High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding it was a priv

STATE OF M.P.versusKEDIA LEATHER AND LIQUOR LTD. AND ORS .

2003 INSC 40519 August 2003Case Partly allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh challenged the closure orders issued by a Sub‑Divisional Magistrate under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) against Kedia Leather and Liquor Ltd. for alleged water and air pollution. The High Court held that the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and

INDIAN COUNCIL FOR ENVIRO-LEGAL ACTIONversusUNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

2011 INSC 49818 July 2011Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a long‑running environmental dispute in which chemical industries in Bichhri, Rajasthan had been ordered in 1996 to pay Rs.37.385 crore for remediation of toxic sludge and to have their plants closed. Despite the judgment, the respondents repeatedly filed interlocutory applications to avoid p

IN RE: NOISE POLLUTION - IMPLEMENTATION OF THE LAWS FOR RESTRICTING USE OF LOUDSPEAKERS AND HIGH VOLUME PRODUCING SOUND SYSTEMSversus.

2005 INSC 29718 July 2005Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained a public‑interest writ filed by engineer Anil K. Mittal after a 13‑year‑old girl died because loudspeaker noise prevented her cries from being heard. The petition sought stringent enforcement of laws restricting loudspeakers, firecrackers, vehicular horns and other high‑volume sound system

TAMIL NADU POLLUTION CONTROL BOARDversusSTERLITE INDUSTRIES (I) LTD. & ORS.

2019 INSC 22018 February 2019Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether the National Green Tribunal (NGT) could entertain direct appeals (leapfrog appeals) against original orders of the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB) under the Air and Water Acts, specifically the refusal to renew consent for Sterlite Industries' copper smelter. The Court held

M.C. MEHTA & ANR. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC.

1986 INSC 1917 February 1986Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a public‑interest writ petition filed by environmental activist M.C. Mehta on behalf of Delhi residents challenging two orders that prohibited Shriram Foods & Fertiliser Industries from operating its caustic‑chlorine plant in a densely populated area of Delhi. After a series of oleum‑gas leak

HANUMAN LAXMAN AROOSKARversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2020 INSC 4916 January 2020Disposed off

The Union of India sought a direction that the minutes of the 40th meeting of the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) dated 23 April 2019 be placed on record so that the Supreme Court's embargo on the environmental clearance (EC) for the Mopa greenfield airport could be lifted. The Court examined whether the EAC had adequ

ARUN KUMAR SHARMA & ORS.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.

2025 INSC 82614 July 2025Dismissed

The appellants filed an application before the National Green Tribunal (NGT) seeking to quash a No‑Objection Certificate (NOC) and consent for a petrol pump at Khasra No. 109/1/2, alleging violations of environmental and municipal regulations. While the NGT dismissed the application, the appellants appealed to the Supr

M/S INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LIMITEDversusV. B. R. MENON & OTHERS

2023 INSC 23114 March 2023Disposed off

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) in Chennai ordered the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) to make it mandatory for all petroleum retail outlets to obtain Consent to Establish (CTE) and Consent to Operate (CTO) before setting up or operating, in addition to directing the installation of vapour recovery systems (VR

M.C. MEHTAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

1991 INSC 7514 March 1991Directions issued

M.C. Mehta, an advocate and chairman of the Environmental Protection Cell, filed a writ petition under Article 32 seeking the closure of hazardous industries and regulation of vehicular and thermal power pollution in Delhi. The Supreme Court examined the constitutional mandate under Articles 48A and 51A, which impose a

CHHETRIYA PARDUSHAN MUKTI SANGHARSH SAMITIversusSTATE OF U.P AND ORS.

1990 INSC 23013 August 1990Dismissed

The Chhetriya Pardushan Mukti Sangharsh Samiti filed a letter alleging that an oil mill and a refinery in the Sarnath area were causing severe air and water pollution, leading to health hazards and ecological damage, and treated the letter as a writ petition under Article 32. The respondents, including the State of U.P

INDIAN COUNCIL FOR ENVIRO-LEGAL ACTIONversusUNION OF INDIA

1996 INSC 23713 February 1996Dismissed

The Supreme Court entertained a social‑action writ filed by the Indian Council for Enviro‑Legal Action on behalf of villagers of Bichhri, who suffered severe water, soil and health damage due to untreated effluents and toxic sludge from private chemical industries. The petition sought directions against the Union of In

M. C. MEHTAversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2020 INSC 3213 January 2020Directions issued

The Supreme Court, hearing a writ petition under Article 32, examined the severe air and water pollution in Delhi and the National Capital Region, identifying stubble burning, construction and demolition activities, open waste dumping, unpaved roads, garbage burning and traffic congestion as major contributors. It held

ARJUN GOPAL AND ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2017 INSC 89712 September 2017Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard an application for modification of its November 2016 interim order that had suspended all licences for the sale of fireworks in the National Capital Region (NCR) after severe air‑pollution following Diwali 2016. Petitioners – fireworks manufacturers and suppliers – argued that a total ban was di

M.C. MEHTAversusKAMAL NATH AND ORS.

2000 INSC 32912 May 2000

The Supreme Court revisited a writ petition filed under Article 32 concerning the Mis Span Motel's pollution of the Beas River. The Court affirmed that damages can be awarded for environmental restoration and for victims under the polluter‑pays principle, but held that a pollution fine cannot be imposed without a crimi

JOLLY GEORGE AND ANR.versusGEORGE ELIAS AND ASSOCIATES AND ORS.

2023 INSC 36512 April 2023Disposed off

George Elias & Associates, engaged in road works, purchased Hot Mix Plants and obtained an Acknowledgement Certificate under the Kerala Micro Small and Medium Enterprises (MSME) Facilitation Act, 2019, as well as "Consent to Establish" from the Kerala State Pollution Control Board. Their application for a licence to in

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERSversusGANESH WOOD PRODUCTS AND ORS. ETC.

1995 INSC 55411 September 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the validity of the Himachal Pradesh government's refusal to approve several katha‑manufacturing units after the Industrial Projects Approval and Review Authority (IPARA) had given provisional approvals. The Court held that IPARA’s approvals were merely administrative recommendations and did

M. NIZAMUDDINversusM/S. CHEMPLAST SANMAR LTD. AND ORS.

2010 INSC 13910 March 2010Disposed off

Chemplast Sanmar Ltd. sought to set up a PVC plant in Cuddalore, Tamil Nadu, importing Vinyl Chloride Monomer (VCM) via a marine terminal and laying pipelines that cross the Uppanar river. The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF) granted environmental clearance under the 1991 Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Notific

ORISSA STATE (PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION) BOARDversusM/S. ORIENT PAPER MILLS & ANR.

2003 INSC 16010 March 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The Orissa State (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Board prosecuted Orient Paper Mills for exceeding air‑pollutant standards after the mill, situated in an area declared an Air Pollution Control Area by Gazette notifications (1984, 1986, 1988), failed to obtain consent. The Board framed charges under Section 37(1)

ELECTROSTEEL STEELS LIMITEDversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ETC

2021 INSC 8599 December 2021Appeal(s) allowed

Electrosteel Steels Ltd. obtained environmental clearance (EC) and consent to establish a steel plant at a specified site in Bokaro, but later shifted the plant 5.3 km away, allegedly encroaching forest land. The Ministry of Environment and the Jharkhand State Pollution Control Board (JSPCB) revoked the EC, leading the

M.C. MEHTAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2009 INSC 7508 May 2009Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined extensive illegal mining in the Aravalli Hills of Haryana, where numerous mines operated without environmental clearances, rehabilitation plans, or compliance with statutory reclamation requirements, causing severe groundwater depletion and ecological damage. The Court considered earlier orde

NEETU SOLVENTSversusVINEET NAGAR & ORS.

2026 INSC 4556 May 2026Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, manufacturers of formaldehyde and its resins, operated units in Rajasthan and Haryana under Consent to Establish (CTE) and Consent to Operate (CTO) granted by the respective State Pollution Control Boards (PCBs). The National Green Tribunal (NGT) ordered closure of these units for lacking prior Environm

G. SUNDARRAJANversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2013 INSC 3146 May 2013Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the legality of the Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project (KKNPP) amid public opposition, focusing on whether the plant complied with environmental, coastal‑zone, and safety regulations. It held that the project was undertaken under the national nuclear policy reflected in the Atomic Energy Act, 1

VANASHAKTIversusUNION OF INDIA

2025 INSC 9615 August 2025Case Partly allowed

The petition challenged the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change’s notification dated 29 January 2025 (S.O. 523(E)) and the accompanying Office Memorandum of 30 January 2025, which altered the regime of environmental clearance for building and construction projects under Entry 8(a) and 8(b) of the 2006 Sc

KEYSTONE REALTORS PVT. LTD.versusSHRI ANIL V THARTHARE & ORS.

2019 INSC 13123 December 2019Dismissed

Keystone Realtors Pvt. Ltd. undertook a residential redevelopment project in Mumbai. The project’s built‑up area grew from 8,720.32 sq m to 32,395.17 sq m, triggering the need for an Environmental Clearance (EC) under the 2006 EIA Notification, which was granted on 2 May 2013. The appellant later increased the area by

DELHI POLLUTION CONTROL COMMITTEEversusLODHI PROPERTY CO. LTD. ETC.

2025 INSC 9233 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC) appealed against a Delhi High Court decision that held it could not levy restitutionary or compensatory damages under s.33A of the Water Act and s.31A of the Air Act, on the ground that such powers amounted to penalties. The Supreme Court examined the statutory scheme, the p

STATE OF MEGHALAYAversusALL DIMASA STUDENTS UNION, DIMA-HASAO DISTRICT COMMITTEE & ORS.

2019 INSC 7213 July 2019Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a series of appeals arising from the National Green Tribunal's (NGT) orders that banned rat‑hole coal mining in Meghalaya, directed the State to deposit Rs 100 crore for environmental restoration, and held that all coal extracted after May 2016 vested in the State. The Court held that the NGT

COMMON CAUSEversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2017 INSC 7002 August 2017Directions issued

The Supreme Court examined a massive illegal mining scandal in Odisha involving 187 iron and manganese ore leases, many of which operated without environmental or forest clearances, exceeded mining plans, or violated statutory provisions. The Court rejected the lease‑holders' claim that the Justice M.B. Shah Commission

STER LITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA) LTD. ETC. ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS. ETC. ETC.

2013 INSC 2042 April 2013Appeal(s) allowed

Sterlite Industries obtained environmental clearance and consent orders to set up a copper smelter in Tuticorin in 1995. The Madras High Court ordered its closure, citing lack of a mandatory public hearing, violation of a 25‑km distance condition from an ecologically sensitive area, and an inadequate green‑belt require

A.P. POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD-IIversusPROF. M.V. NAYUDU (RETD.) AND ORS.

2000 INSC 5641 December 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Andhra Pradesh Government could lawfully exempt a hazardous vegetable‑oil industry from a statutory 10‑km prohibition around the Osman Sagar and Himayat Sagar reservoirs, which supply drinking water to Hyderabad and Secunderabad. The State had issued GO 153 granting the exemption

K. GURUPRASAD RAOversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 3971 July 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court heard a public‑interest writ petition seeking the cancellation of a mining lease and a ban on mining within one kilometre of the 16th‑century Jambunatha Temple, a protected monument in Karnataka. The petition challenged mining activities that were alleged to have caused structural damage to the temple

ALEMBIC PHARMACEUTICALS LTD.versusROHIT PRAJAPATI & ORS.

2020 INSC 3261 April 2020Appeal(s) allowed

Three pharmaceutical units in Ankleshwar began operations without obtaining the prior environmental clearance (EC) mandated by the 1994 Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) notification. The Ministry of Environment and Forests issued a 2002 circular allowing defaulting units to obtain an ex‑post‑facto EC, which the Na

PARTHIBAN BLUE METAL ETC.versusTHE MEMBER SECY. T.N. POLLN. CONT. BD. AND ORS.

2007 INSC 881 February 2007Disposed off

The appellants operated nine stone‑crushing units in Trisoolam Village, Tamil Nadu, and were served notices by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board for being within 500 metres of a residential area. The appellants contended that the permissible distance had been reduced to 300 metres and that all their units were bey

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search