Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: environment protection rules Page 1 of about 9,223 results (0.077 seconds)

Mar 18 2004 (SC)

M.C. Mehta Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2004SC4016; 2005(5)ALLMR(SC)353; (2004)3CompLJ199(SC); JT2004(4)SC181; 2004(3)SCALE396; (2004)12SCC118

..... , 1994, to the extent material for the present purpose, reads as under :'s.o.60(6) whereas a notification under clause (a) of sub-rule (3) of rule 5 of the environment (protection) rules, 1986 inviting objections from the public within sixty days from the date of publication of the said notification, against the intention of the central government to impose ..... , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) and clause (v) of sub-section (2), of section 3 of the environment (protection) act, 1986 (29 of 1986), read with rule 5 of the environment (protection) rules, 1988 the central government hereby prohibits the carrying on the following process and operations, except with its prior permission, in the areas specified in the ..... the powers conferred by sub-section (1) and clause (v) of sub-section (2) of section 3 of the environment (protection) act, 1986 (29 of 1986) read with clause (d) of sub-rule (3) of rule 5 of the environment (protection) rules, 1986, the central government hereby directs that on and from the date of publication of this notification in the official gazette ..... , 1986 (29 of 1986), (hereinafter referred to as the said act), read with sub-rule (4) of rule 5 of the environment (protection) rules, 1986, the central government hereby delegates the powers conferred on it to take measures for protecting and improving the quality of the environment and preventing, controlling and abating environmental pollution, to be exercised also by the state governments as .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 02 2013 (SC)

Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... follow the statutory process, it is for the responsible authorities."the aforesaid passage will make it clear that it is for the authorities under the environment (protection) act, 1986, the environment (protection)rules, 1986 and the notifications issued there under to determine the scope of the project, the extent of the screening and the assessment of the cumulative ..... illegality, irrationality, and procedural impropriety."thus, if the environmental clearance granted by the competent authority is clearly outside the powers given to it by the environment (protection) act, 1986, the environment (protection) rules, 1986 or the notifications issued there under, the high court could quash the environmental clearance on the ground of illegality. if the environmental clearance is ..... hearing in accordance with the procedure laid down in schedule iv. as there was no mandatory requirement in the procedure laid down under the environment (protection) act, 1986 and the environment(protection) rules, 1986 and the notifications dated 27.01.1994 as amended by notification dated 04.05.1994 that a public hearing has to be conducted ..... and operations in an area, by notification in the official gazette. in exercise of these powers under section 3(2)(v) of the environment (protection) act, 1986 and rule 5(3) of the environment (protection) rules, 1986, the central government has issued a notification dated 27.01.1994 imposing restrictions and prohibitions on the expansion and modernization of any .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 09 2001 (HC)

Rambhau Patil, Secretary, National Fish Workers' Forum and Maharashtra ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2002(1)ALLMR385; 2002(1)BomCR76

..... by the government of india was clearly in breach of the relevant notifications issued by the government of india, ministry of environment and forests, under section 3 of the environment (protection) act, 1986, read with rule 5 of the environment (protection) rules, 1986.in this connection, it was submitted that the notification dated 27th january, 1994 laid down the requirements and procedure ..... restriction imposed, and do not contend that such prohibitions and restrictions should not have been imposed. this statement of mr. kalsekar, therefore, that sub-rule (4) of rule 5 of the environment (protection) rules, 1986 is invalid and void must be rejected.21. it was then submitted by the petitioners in all the three writ petitions that the environmental ..... was void, since it vested in the central government unbridled, unguided power to dispense with the requirement of notice under clause (a) of sub-rule (3).20. rule 5 of the environment (protection) rules, 1996 lays down the factors which the central government may take into consideration while prohibiting or restricting the location of industries and carrying on of processes ..... stayed forthwith, and the sanction accorded by the government of india be quashed. in writ petition no. 348 of 2000, the petitioners have also prayed that rule 5(4) of the environment (protection) rules, 1986 be declared to be void and unconstitutional. further, the amendment to paragraph (viii) of the crz notification dated 19th february, 1991 brought about .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 10 2000 (HC)

Visakha Spca Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2000(6)ALD539; 2000(6)ALT666

..... aspects, it is necessary to refer to the notification dated 19-2-1991, which was issued under sections 3(1) and 3(2)(v) of the environment (protection) act, 1986 and rule 5(3)(d) of the environment (protection) rules, 1986 declaring the coastal stretches as coastal regulation (7) ne (crz) and regulating activities in the crz, in view of the said notification of the central ..... for enviro-legal action v. union of india and others, jt 1998 (7) sc 31, while considering the constitution of authorities under section 3(3) of the environment (protection) act, 1972 and rule 5 of the rules made thereunder, following the directions of the court made earlier, it was represented on behalf of the state (andhra pradesh) that for constitution of coastal management authority ..... sea cost at ramakrishnapuram beach, opposite madhuvan restaurant, visakhapatnam as illegal and violative of the notification issued by the central government dated 19-2-1991 under the provisions of the environment (protection) act, 1986 and the rules made thereunder.2. the petitioner, a society which came into existence about five years ago, claims to have been formed for the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 10 2001 (HC)

Siromani Mittasala, Chairman, Paryavarana Parirakshaka Parishad Vs. Pr ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2002(1)ALD136; 2002(2)ALT356

..... we may refer to water (prevention and control of pollution) act, 1974 ('water act' for brevity) as well as the environment (protection) rules, 1986 ('the environment rules' for brevity) made under sections 6 and 25 of the environment (protection) act, 1986 ('the environment act' for brevity).37. as per section 2(g) of the water act sewage effluent means effluent from any sewerage system or ..... control board. therefore, even for municipalities, the water act applies and they should adhere to the provisions of the water act, air act, environment protection act as well as municipalities act.38. under sub-rule (3-a) of rule 3 of the environment rules every person including the municipalities has to adhere to standards as specified in schedule vi. the said sub ..... central authorities expert bodies etc. is undertaken the court's review of the decision should be limited. the said view was affirmed by the supreme court in dahanu taluka environment protection group v. b.s.e.s., : (1991)2scc539 , when it observed as under:it is sufficient to observe that it is primarily for the governments concerned to ..... environmental matters 18. the high court has no appellate jurisdiction over the decisions taken by the government or statutory boards under various enactments dealing with environment like municipal laws, panchayat laws, air act, environment protection act and water act. the court has power of judicial review to scrutinise all the decisions of the pubic authorities including the matters relating .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 14 2007 (SC)

Suresh Estates Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Municipal Corp. of Greater Mumba ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 2008(1)ALLMR(SC)768; 2008(3)BomCR233; 2007(14)SCALE572; (2009)3SCC186; 2008AIRSCW163

..... forests issued notification i on february 19, 1991 under section 3(1) and 3(2)(v) of the environment (protection) act, 1986 and rule 5(3)(d) of the environment (protection) rules, 1986 declaring coastal stretches as coastal regulation zone (crz) and regulating activities in the crz, as result of which the plot belonging to them falls within crz ii. what is ..... 2, 1991 when the crz notification was issued, the only building regulations that were existing in city of mumbai, were the dc rules, 1967. in view of the contents of crz ii notification issued under the provisions of environment protection act which has the effect of prevailing over the provisions of other acts, the application submitted by the appellants to develop the plot ..... central government in respect of the crz notification on september 8, 1998 states that the existing rules would be those, which were in force as on february 19, 1991. the draft regulations of ..... forest on august 18, 2006 clarified that the development control rules of 1967 would apply. the assertion made by the appellants that the clarification issued by the ministry of environment and forest is binding on the state government in view of the salutary provisions of section 3, 5 and 24 of the environment (protection) act, 1986 deserves consideration. the clarification issued by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 02 2000 (HC)

Kisan Mehta and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2000(4)ALLMR1; 2001(1)BomCR451

..... petition.19. the crz notification was issued on 19th february, 1991 in exercise of the powers conferred upon the central government by clause (d) of sub-rule (3) of rule 5 of the environment protection rules, 1986 declaring the coastal stretches of seas, bays, estuaries, creeks, rivers and backwaters which are influenced by tidal action (in the landward side) upto ..... . government of india, issued a notification on 19th february, 1991 under section 3(1) and 3(2)(v) of the environment protection act, 1986 and rule 5(3)(d) of the environment (protection) rules, 1986, whereunder the central government declared the coastal stretches of seas, bays, estuaries, creeks, rivers and backwaters which are influenced by tidal action (in the ..... frozen to the laws and norms existing on the date of the notification. this interpretation, in our view, is perfectly in consonance with the legislative intentions behind the environment (protection) act, 1986.'42. in m/s. buildarch & another a division bench of this court considered the same question and relying upon the decision in overseas chinese cuisine ..... notification. the state governments and union territory administrations were directed to ensure adherence to these regulations and violations, if any, were made subject to the provisions of the environment (protection) act, 1986. the petitioners have referred to the various provisions of the notification and submitted that despite such a notification, several coastal states, including respondent no. 1 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 08 2002 (HC)

Chikkarangappa and anr. Vs. the Karnataka State Pollution Control Boar ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : 2002(4)KarLJ196

..... that noise is within the scheme of the provisions of the act an environmental pollutant, the standards whereof could have been prescribed by the central government in rule 3 of the environment (protection) rules, 1986.13. that brings me to the question whether the board has any power independent of section 22-a of the act to take action against the ..... pollutants discharged into the atmosphere, a reference to rule 3 of the environment (protection) rules, 1986 framed by the central government in exercise of its powers under sections 6 and 25 of the environment (protection) act would be necessary. the said rule inter alia provides that for purposes of protecting and improving the quality of the environment and preventing and abating environmental pollution, the standards ..... is therefore clearly established.9. mr. srinivasan however argued that the standards prescribed in terms of rule 3 of the rules could not be made a basis for any action against the petitioner. he urged that the expression 'environmental pollutant' as defined under the environment (protection) act, 1986 did not include noise. section 2(a) of the air (prevention and control ..... pollutant', the question of it being treated as one while empowering the government to make rules did not arise. he urged that rule 3 insofar as the same prescribed the allowable limits of noise as a pollutant was ultra vires of the provisions of the environment (protection) act, 1986 hence deserved to be struck down. by the same logic, he urged .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 06 2001 (HC)

India Rural Reconstruction and Disaster Vs. Government of India and or ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 2002(1)ALD792; 2002(1)ALT131

..... considered and examined by the central government and modification was approved by earlier executive order dated 27-9-1996 for which the provisions of environment (protection) rules, 1986 do not apply. further, the slab system, in our view, is not violative of provisions of crz notification and in any ..... 114(e) dated 19-2-1991 issued under sections 3(1) and 3(2)(v) of the act and rule 5(3)(d) of the environment protection rules, 1986 (for short 'the rules') and all other powers vesting in this behalf, declaring coastal stretches as crz and regulating activities in the crz ..... by the ministry of environment and forests. by this notification the central government declared coastal stretches of seas, bays estuaries, ..... 11/40 dated 13-3-1997 and all consequential orders and actions as illegal, arbitrary and violative of the environment protection act, 1986 (for short 'the act') and the rules made thereunder, and to set aside the same.3. it is useful to notice the averments made in paragraphs ..... bodies.11. the government of india - the first respondent have also filed separate counter-affidavit through its deputy director in the ministry of environment and forests. according to the central government, this modification is within the provisions of crz notification wherein it was stipulated that the crz along .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 19 1991 (SC)

Dahanu Taluka Environment Protection Group and anr. Vs. Bombay Suburba ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : JT1991(2)SC1; 1991(1)SCALE472; (1991)2SCC539; 1991(1)LC578(SC)

..... in such a way that it found necessary the fgd plant could be installed at a later date. shri ashok desai also submits that the environment (protection) rules, 1986, which have been promulgated on 30th august, 1990, also envisage a policy of increasing the stack height so that contamination by emission of ..... s. ranganathan, j.1. the two petitioners, who are 'environment protection groups' objected to the clerance, by the state of maharashtra and the union of india, of a proposal of the ..... company may seek and obtain relaxations or modifications of the conditions that may prove detrimental to environment, we direct that the condition requiring the installation of a fgd plant should not be relaxed without a full consideration of the consequences and ..... government after fully considering all relevant aspects and in particular the aspects of the environmental pollution. sufficient safeguards against pollution of air, water and environment have been insisted upon in the conditions of grant however, in order to allay the apprehensions on the part of the petitioners that the ..... the development activities arc consistent with principles of environmental protection and conservation'. the notification proposes to declare dahanu taluka as an ecologically fragile area and proceeds to impose restrictions on the setting up of industries which have detrimental effect on the environment. it sets out new guidelines for permitting/restricting industries .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //