M. C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath

Last updated

M.C.Mehta v. Kamal Nath
Emblem of the Supreme Court of India.svg
Court Supreme Court of India
Full case nameM.C.Mehta v. Kamal Nath and Ors.
Decided13 December 1996
Citation(s)(1997) 1 SCC 388
Court membership
Judges sitting Kuldip Singh, S. Saghnr Ahma
Case opinions
The public trust doctrine, as discussed by the Court in this judgment was a part of the law of the land
Decision byKuldip Singh

M. C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath was a landmark case in Indian environmental law. In the case, the Supreme Court of India held that the public trust doctrine applied in India. [1]

Contents

Facts of the case

The Indian Express published an article reporting that Span Motels Private Limited, which owns Span Resorts, had floated another ambitious venture, Span Club. The family of Indian politician Kamal Nath has direct links with this company. [2] The club was built after encroaching upon 27.12 bighas of land, including substantial forestland, in 1990. The land was later regularised and leased out to the company on 11 April 1994.

The regularisation was done when Nath was Minister of Environment and Forests. This encroachment led to the swelling of the Beas River, and the swollen river changed its course and engulfed the Span Club and the adjoining lawns, washing it away. For almost five months now, the Span Resorts management has been moving bulldozers and earth movers to turn the course of the Beas for a second time.

A worrying thought was that of the river eating into the mountains, leading to landslides which were an occasional occurrence in that area. In September, these caused floods in the Beas and property estimated to be worth Rs. 105 crore was destroyed. The Government of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests by the letter dated 24.11.1993, addressed to the Secretary, Forest, Government of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla conveyed its prior approval in terms of Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for leasing to the Motel 27 bighas and 12 biswas of forest land adjoining to the land already on lease with the Motel. An expert committee formed to assess the situation of the area arrived at the following conclusion;

"The river is presently in a highly unstable regime after the extraordinary floods of 1995, and it is difficult to predict its behaviour if another high flood occur in the near future. A long-term planning for flood control in the Kullu Valley needs to be taken up immediately with the advice of an organisation having expertise in the field, and permanent measures shall be taken to protect the area so that recurrence of such a heavy flood is mitigated permanently".

Arguments for the defendants

However, it could be easily ascertained from the facts that the Motel had made various constructions on the surrounding area and on the banks of the river.

Judgment of the court

The forest lands which have been given on lease to the Motel by the State Governments are situated at the bank of the river Beas. Beas is a young and dynamic river. The river is fast-flowing, carrying large boulders, at the time of flood. When water velocity is not sufficient to carry the boulders, these are deposited in the channel often blocking the flow of water. Under such circumstances the river stream changes its course, remaining within the valley but swinging from one bank to the other. The right bank of the river Beas where the motel is located mostly comes under forest, the left bank consists of plateaus, having steep banks facing the river, where fruit orchards and cereal cultivation are predominant. The area being ecologically fragile and full of scenic beauty should not have been permitted to be converted into private ownership and for commercial gains.

Doctrine of Public trust under Roman Law

The notion that the public has a right to expect certain lands and natural areas to retain their natural characteristic is finding its way into the law of the land. The ancient Roman Empire developed a legal theory known as the "Doctrine of the Public Trust". It was founded on the ideas that certain common properties such as rivers, sea-shore, forests and the air were held by Government in trusteeship for the free and unimpeded use of the general public. Under the Roman Law these resources were either owned by no one (Res Nullious) or by everyone in common (Res Communious).

Doctrine of Public trust under English common Law

Under the English common law, however, the Sovereign could own these resources but the ownership was limited in nature, the Crown could not grant these properties to private owners if the effect was to interfere with the public interests in navigation of fishing. Resources that were suitable for these uses were deemed to be held in trust by the Crown for the benefit of the public. The Public Trust Doctrine primarily rests on the principle that certain resources like air, sea, waters and the forests have such a great importance to the people as a whole that it would be wholly unjustified to make them a subject of private ownership. The said resources being a gift of nature. They should be made freely available to everyone irrespective of the status in life. The doctrine enjoins upon the Government to protect the resources for the enjoyment of the general public rather than to permit their use for private ownership or commercial purposes. Three types of restrictions on governmental authority are often thought to be imposed by the public trust: first, the property subject to the trust must not only be used for a public purpose, but it must be held available for use by the general public; second, the property may not be sold, even for a fair cash equivalent; and third, the property must be maintained for particular types of uses.

Lake Mono Case

Supreme Court of California said in the Mono Lake case, "….the public trust is more than an affirmation of state power to use public property for public purposes. It is an affirmation of the duty of the state to protect the people's common heritage of streams, lakes, marshlands and tidelands, surrendering that right of protection only in rare cases when the abandonment of that right is consistent with the purposes of the trust...." Our legal system-based on English Common Law - includes the public trust doctrine as part of its jurisprudence. The State is the trustee of all natural resources which are by nature meant for public use and enjoyment. The State as a trustee is under a legal duty to protect the natural resources. These resources meant for public use cannot be converted into private ownership.

The esthetic use and the pristine glory of the natural resources, the environment and the eco-systems of our country cannot be permitted to be eroded for private, commercial or any other use unless the courts find it necessary in good faith, for the public good and in public interest to encroach upon the said resources.

The Court said that they had no hesitation in holding that the Himachal Pradesh Government committed patent breach of public trust by leasing the ecologically fragile land to the Motel management. Both the lease - transactions are in patent breach of the trust held by the State Government. The second lease granted in the year 1994 was virtually of the land which is a part of riverbed. Even the board in its report has recommended stopping the lease of the area.

Orders of the Court

The public trust doctrine, as discussed by the Court in this judgment was a part of the law of the land. The prior approval granted by the Government of India, Ministry of Environment and Forest and the lease-deed dated 11.04.1994 in favour of the Motel were quashed. The lease granted to the Motel by the said lease-deed in respect of 27 bighas and 12 biswas of area, is cancelled and set aside. The Himachal Pradesh Government shall take over the area and restore it to its original-natural conditions. The Motel shall pay compensation by way of cost for the restitution of the environment and ecology of the area. The pollution caused by various constitutions made by the Motel in the riverbed and the banks on the river Beas have to be removed and reversed. [1]

Related Research Articles

Public property is property that is dedicated to public use. The term may be used either to describe the use to which the property is put, or to describe the character of its ownership. This is in contrast to private property, owned by an individual person or artificial entities that represent the financial interests of persons, such as corporations. State ownership, also called public ownership, government ownership or state property, are property interests that are vested in the state, rather than an individual or communities.

In all modern states, a portion of land is held by central or local governments. This is called public land, state land, or Crown land. The system of tenure of public land, and the terminology used, varies between countries. The following examples illustrate some of the range.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Freedom to roam</span> Right of public access to land or bodies of water

The freedom to roam, or "everyman's right", is the general public's right to access certain public or privately owned land, lakes, and rivers for recreation and exercise. The right is sometimes called the right of public access to the wilderness or the "right to roam".

Land trusts are nonprofit organizations which own and manage land, and sometimes waters. There are three common types of land trust, distinguished from one another by the ways in which they are legally structured and by the purposes for which they are organized and operated:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ravi River</span> River in India and Pakistan

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Land tenure</span> Legal regime in which area owned by an individual is held by another person

In common law systems, land tenure, from the French verb "tenir" means "to hold", is the legal regime in which land owned by an individual is possessed by someone else who is said to "hold" the land, based on an agreement between both individuals. It determines who can use land, for how long and under what conditions. Tenure may be based both on official laws and policies, and on informal local customs. In other words, land tenure implies a system according to which land is held by an individual or the actual tiller of the land but this person does not have legal ownership. It determines the holder's rights and responsibilities in connection with their holding. The sovereign monarch, known in England as The Crown, held land in its own right. All land holders are either its tenants or sub-tenants. Tenure signifies a legal relationship between tenant and lord, arranging the duties and rights of tenant and lord in relationship to the land. Over history, many different forms of land tenure, i.e., ways of holding land, have been established.

Riparian water rights is a system for allocating water among those who possess land along its path. It has its origins in English common law. Riparian water rights exist in many jurisdictions with a common law heritage, such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and states in the eastern United States.

Water right in water law is the right of a user to use water from a water source, e.g., a river, stream, pond or source of groundwater. In areas with plentiful water and few users, such systems are generally not complicated or contentious. In other areas, especially arid areas where irrigation is practiced, such systems are often the source of conflict, both legal and physical. Some systems treat surface water and ground water in the same manner, while others use different principles for each.

Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff, 467 U.S. 229 (1984), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that a state could use eminent domain to take land that was overwhelmingly concentrated in the hands of private landowners and redistribute it to the wider population of private residents.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Forestry law</span> Field of law

Forestry laws govern activities in designated forest lands, most commonly with respect to forest management and timber harvesting. Forestry laws generally adopt management policies for public forest resources, such as multiple use and sustained yield. Forest management is split between private and public management, with public forests being sovereign property of the State. Forestry laws are now considered an international affair.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Public trust doctrine</span>

The public trust doctrine is the principle that the sovereign holds in trust for public use some resources such as shoreline between the high and low tide lines, regardless of private property ownership.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social forestry in India</span>

Social forestry is the management and protection of forests and afforestation of barren and deforested lands with the purpose of helping environmental, social and rural development. The term social forestry was first used in 1976 by The National Commission on Agriculture, when the government of India aimed to reduce pressure on forests by planting trees on all unused and fallow lands. It was intended as a democratic approach to forest conservation and usage, maximizing land utilization for multiple purposes.

Oil and gas law in the United States is the branch of law that pertains to the acquisition and ownership rights in oil and gas both under the soil before discovery and after its capture, and adjudication regarding those rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Washington State Department of Natural Resources</span> State agency managing state trust lands

The Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) manages over 3,000,000 acres (12,000 km2) of forest, range, agricultural, and commercial lands in the U.S. state of Washington. The DNR also manages 2,600,000 acres (11,000 km2) of aquatic areas which include shorelines, tidelands, lands under Puget Sound and the coast, and navigable lakes and rivers. Part of the DNR's management responsibility includes monitoring of mining cleanup, environmental restoration, providing scientific information about earthquakes, landslides, and ecologically sensitive areas. DNR also works towards conservation, in the form of Aquatic Reserves such as Maury Island and in the form of Natural Area Preserves like Mima Mounds or Natural Resource Conservation Areas like Woodard Bay Natural Resource Conservation Area.

Jaisinghpur is a small town and subdivision in Kangra district of Himachal Pradesh, India. There are two tehsils: the main tehsil is in Jaisinghpur and the sub tehsil is in Alampur. The population of Jaisinghpur Town is 2,602 and the overall population of Jaisinghpur Sub-Division is 58,623. It was named after Katoch, a Rajput king of the Princely estate of Kangra-Lambagraon, Col. His Highness Maharaja Shri Sir Jai Chand Katoch who ruled from 1864 to 1933. The current Maharaja of Jaisinghpur is Raja Akshey Kumar who ascended the throne in 2005, born on 12 June 1995 in the Sharma dynasty. Maharaja Akshey Kumar owns 700 acres of land, out of which the Maharaja donated 300 acres for the construction of hospitals and schools. The Maharaja also donated his Sujanpur Fort to the government as a heritage site. Maharaja Akshey Kumar leads a simple life and can be seen in Jaisinghpur on occasions like Holi and Dussehra. Jaisinghpur is situated on the bank of river Beas. It is known for its "Chaugan", which is the term used in Himachal Pradesh for a plain. There are several notable temples in the town such as the Janaki Nath temple, the Radhey Krishan temple near Bus Adda, the Laxmi Narayan temple, the Baba Mani Ram Temple, Baba khadesri kutiya, the Neel Kanth Mahadev Temple, the Dhudu Mahadev Mandir temple, the Guga temple, the Shitala Mata temple. There is also a Dargah midtown, popularly known as Baba Shah Mast Ali Dargah, and a Gurudwara on Jaisinghpur Lambagoan road. The Shitala Mata temple is a famous temple of the town on Tinbar-Palampur road. Another famous temple is the Jankinath temple. One of the more notable tourist places is Naguli Naag, which has a swimming pool. Another one is Basanti da Patan near the Beas river where people can go boating.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Water law in the United States</span>

Water law in the United States refers to the Water resources law laws regulating water as a resource in the United States. Beyond issues common to all jurisdictions attempting to regulate water's uses, water law in the United States must contend with:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Right of way</span> Legal right to pass through land belonging to another

Right of way is the legal right, established by grant from a landowner or long usage, to pass along a specific route through property belonging to another. A similar right of access also exists on land held by a government, lands that are typically called public land, state land, or Crown land. When one person owns a piece of land that is bordered on all sides by lands owned by others, an easement may exist or might be created so as to initiate a right of way through the bordering land.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Boeung Kak</span> Shrunken lake due to urban development in Phnom Penh

Boeung Kak is an area in Khan Daun Penh and Khan Toul Kork centrally located in the capital city of Cambodia, Phnom Penh. Until around 2010, it was covered by the largest urban lake in Phnom Penh. Residential areas, businesses, restaurants, hotels, embassies and other local businesses surrounded the area of the lake. Phnom Penh's main railway station formerly sat on its south coast. The lake itself was 90 hectares in area.

<i>National Audubon Society v. Superior Court</i>

National Audubon Society v. Superior Court was a key case in California highlighting the conflict between the public trust doctrine and appropriative water rights. The Public Trust Doctrine is based on the principle that certain resources are too valuable to be privately owned and must remain available for public use. In National Audubon Society v. Superior Court, the court held that the public trust doctrine restricts the amount of water that can be withdrawn from navigable waterways. The basis for the Public Trust Doctrine goes back to Roman law. Under Roman law, the air, the rivers, the sea and the seashore were incapable of private ownership; they were dedicated to the use of the public. In essence, the public trust doctrine establishes the role of the state as having trustee environmental duties owed to the public that are subsequently enforceable by the public. There is judicial recognition of this, dictating that certain rights of the public are key to individual common law rights. Judicial recognition of the public trust doctrine has been established for tidelands and non-navigable waterways, submerged land and the waters above them, and preservation of a public interest.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">English land law</span> Law of real property in England and Wales

English land law is the law of real property in England and Wales. Because of its heavy historical and social significance, land is usually seen as the most important part of English property law. Ownership of land has its roots in the feudal system established by William the Conqueror after 1066, and with a gradually diminishing aristocratic presence, now sees a large number of owners playing in an active market for real estate.

References

  1. 1 2 "Land Mark Cases". mcmef.org. Archived from the original on 27 December 2008. Retrieved 9 January 2013.
  2. "PM declares his FDs, Kamal Nath & Deora business interests". Indian Express. 9 June 2011. Retrieved 14 May 2013.