A Report on Legal Aspects of Restoration

of Yamuna River
(Environment Management)
Date: 1st Feb 2008

Submitted to
Prof. Varun Arya

Submitted by: - Group 10

Anil Tak I Sonu V. C.

Lalit Vyas Vijay Vyas
Puneet Joshi Yogesh Sharma
Bhupesh Kachhwaha Tapesh Dadhich
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

History & Mythology ............................................................................................................ 2

The Central and State Boards ........................................................................................... 4

Pollution in river Yamuna: Writ Petition (Civil) No.725/1994, News Item

‘HT’, dated 18.7.1994, A.Q.F.M. Yamuna Vs Central Pollution Control Board

& Ors............................................................................................................................................ 6

Yamuna Pollution Matter ................................................................................................... 8

Points Given by Jal Biradari............................................................................................. 14

PIL on Yamuna - Monitoring Committee Sought Demolituon of Proposed

Games Village ........................................................................................................................ 14

Steps already taken............................................................................................................. 17

 HISTORY & MYTHOLOGY

The Yamuna and the Ganges are considered the most sacred rivers in India.
Yamuna, according to the legends, was the daughter of Surya, the Sun God, and sister to
Yama, the God of Death. Consequently, popular belief is that those who take a dip in its
holy waters are not tormented by fears of death.

The river yamuna is intimately connected to Lord Krishna's pastimes. The Lord
Krishna sanctified the River Yamuna from the beginning of His transcendental pastimes
in the world. While His father Vasudeva was crossing the Yamuna with baby Lord
Krishna for a safe place at Gokul on the other bank of the river from Mathura, the Lord
fell down in the river, and by the dust of His lotus feet the river at once became
sanctified.

FACTS & FIGURES

Source: Yamunotri

Length: 1, 370 K.m

Coverage: Uttranchal, Uttar Prades, Delhi and Haryana

Tributaries: Chambal, Betwa, Sind & Ken

 POLLUTION CONTROL ACTS
AND REGULATIONS OF INDIA
In 1976, when the Indian parliament passed the 42nd
amendment to its constitution safeguarding the environment, it
became the first country in the world to do so. The amendment was to
“endeavor to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard
the forests and wild life of the country.” It imposes a duty on every
Indian citizen “to protect and improve the natural environment
including forests, lakes, rivers, and wild life, and to have compassion
for living creatures.” According to the Environment Protection Act of
1986, Environment is that which includes the “inter-relationship
which exists among and between water, air, and land and human
beings, other living creatures, plants, micro-organism and property.”
Essentially, The Water (Prevention & Control) Act, 1974 can be
considered to be truly the first regulations. It has been amended
many times since then. Basically, there are seven Pollution
regulations.
1. The Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, and its
amendments;
2. The Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1974 and
its amendments;
3. The Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and its
amendments;
4. The Environment (Prevention) Act, 1986 and its amendments,
(a) National Environmental Tribunal Act of 1995 and
(b) National Environmental Appellate Authority Act of 1997;
5. Hazardous Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, July 1989 and
6. The Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991.

The Public Liability Insurance Act 1991 has been included as

the sixth environmental regulation because it is the first regulation
which gives some teeth to the other five pollution regulations listed
above.

THE CENTRAL AND STATE BOARDS

It was the Water Act of 1974 which established a Central

Pollution Board and a State Pollution Control Board. Subsequently,
the same Boards have been given the power to govern all the
pollution regulations passed since then and any other to be put in
regulations in the future. Constitution and Authority of the Board
Pollution Boards are to be headed by a Chairman and a few members
who are all appointed. The Chairman as well as the Board members
is appointed by the respective governments. The members to be
appointed to the Boards are to be selected from various interest
groups such as Corporations, Public Health Engineering, Agriculture,
Forestry, Fishery, etc. Basic purpose of these Boards is to advise their
respective governments on any matter concerning the prevention
and control of pollution in their area of jurisdiction. The Central
Board coordinates as well as oversees al the other State Boards and
their functions. To implement any environmental pollution control
act, the Board has the power to obtain information “make surveys of
any area and gauge and keep records of the flow of volume...of the
stream.” It has the power to take samples, analyze any matter from
the industry. The Boards also have the authority to establish or
recognize any laboratory for chemical analytical work.

The water (prevention and control of pollution) act, 1974 and its
amendments

The purpose of this act is “to provide for the prevention and
control of water pollution and the maintenance or restoring
wholesomeness of water for the establishment, with a view to
carrying out the purpose of aforesaid of Boards for the prevention
and control of water pollution, for conferring on and assigning to
such Boards powers and functions relating thereto and for matters
connected therewith.” This is the Act that established the Central and
a State Board and also the authority and power to constitute as many
committees as it feels essential to carry out specific functions for it.

The Act specifically prohibits “any poisonous, noxious or

polluting matter’ into any stream or well. Consent from the State
Board is required for any type of new discharge into any new stream
or well. This also includes consent for “temperature” discharges as
done by cooling tower users. In general, this means that a State
consent or permit is required for all types of intake and/or discharge
of any type of liquid or water either from a running stream or well.
Under these rules, “effluent standards to be complied with by
persons while causing discharge of sewage or sullage or both” have
been specified. Standards for small scale industries have been
specified separately. Penalties for non-compliance with the permit or
polluting in any way are imprisonment for three months and fine of
Rs. 10,000 (One US Dollar equals about thirty six Indian Rupees) or
fine up to Rs. 5,000 per day of violation or both plus any expenses
incurred by the Board for sampling, analysis, inspection etc. These
penalties can also be imposed for “obstructing any person acting
under the orders or direction of the Board” or for “damages to any
work or property of the Board.” There are penalties also which
extend up to seven years plus other monetary fines for other similar
offenses. Any “director, manager, secretary or other officer of the
company may also be deemed to be guilty” if proved that the offense
occurred with their “consent or connivance.” In case of the
government, department head could be held liable. Laboratory the
central as well as the state government can start a lab to do analysis
on samples of water or of sewage or trade effluents for tests. A fee
will be charged for these services. The law can also stop or restrain a
person from discharging any pollutant to any stream or well “which is
likely to cause such pollution from so causing.” Imprisonment up to
three months and a fine up to Rs. 10,000 for every day of violation
during which such failure continues after the conviction for first such
offense.
The water (prevention and control of pollution) cess act, 1977

This law provides for the levy and collection of a Cess on water
consumed by persons carrying on certain industries and by local
authorities, with a view to augment the resources of the Central and
State Boards for the prevention and control of water pollution
constituted under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution)
Act, 1974.”

POLLUTION IN RIVER YAMUNA: WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)

NO.725/1994, NEWS ITEM ‘HT’, DATED 18.7.1994, A.Q.F.M.
YAMUNA VS CENTRAL POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD & ORS.

A news item titled ‘…and Quite Flow Maily Yamuna…’ was

published in a daily News Paper ‘The Hindustan Times’, New Delhi
on 18.7.1994. The said news item was based on findings of Central
Pollution Control Board. The Hon’ble Supreme Court took suo-moto
cognizance of this news item and issued notices on 2.12.1996 to the
Central Board with the directions to conduct investigations in the
cities of Ghaziabad, NOIDA and Modi Nagar with a view to having an
assessment of environment impact and to the status of pollution due
to generation of industrial wastes, municipal sewage, household
wastes and other types of wastes. It was also directed that the Central
Board shall give positive suggestions/schemes to be made operative,
so far as controlling pollution. The Central Pollution Control Board
conducted inspections in the cities of Ghaziabad, NOIDA and Modi
Nagar and submitted a detailed report on 18.12.1996 for the
consideration of the Hon’ble Court. After examining the report of the
Central Board, the Hon’ble Court issued notices to the National River
Conservation Directorate (NRCD) and also to the Ghaziabad
Municipal Corporation for their response.

The Central Board further submitted that the plan for cleaning
of Kali Nadi was required to be evaluated in detail through a
Committee of experts. On the suggestions of the Central Board, the
Hon’ble Supreme Court ordered on 20.3.1998 that the committee
which was constituted in the Writ Petition (Civil) No. 914/1996 might
also be associated for the evaluation of the project proposal for the
Kali Nadi and Ghaziabad, NOIDA action plans and evaluate the
appropriate technology to be adopted for these projects. On the
directions of the Hon’ble Court, the Committee under the
Chairmanship of Shri P.K.Kaul, Ex- Cabinet Secretary submitted its
reports before the Hon’ble Court for consideration. The matter is still
under consideration of the Supreme Court.

The Central Board is regularly monitoring water quality of river

Yamuna and drains joining it in Delhi, in compliance of the Hon’ble
Court’s order. Till date, several reports have been submitted for the
consideration for the Hon’ble court. In its reports, the Central Board
recommended that there should be proper collection of wastewater
generated in Delhi by augmenting sewerage facilities, lying down by
sewer lines. Untreated sewage should not be allowed to flow into the
storm-water drains. Sewage treatment plants are required to be
operated to their full capacity. The existing sewerage network
should be appropriately maintained using three tier maintenance
schedule. Adequate sanitary arrangements for slums and
J.J.Colonies, and use of wastewater after treatment for irrigation,
gardening and other uses were suggested. Delhi might exchange
treated wastewater to fresh water with the State of Haryana.

The Hon’ble Court directed the Ministry of Environment &

Forests and Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India to
study the problem with regard to the treatment of sewage in Delhi
and give their positive and concrete suggestions, so that after 31st
March, 2003, no untreated sewage should go to the river Yamuna.
The matter is still under consideration of the Hon’ble Court.
 YAMUNA POLLUTION MATTER

The Hon’ble Court on 10.4.2001 after considering various

reports submitted by the Central Pollution Control Board on the
status of Yamuna River observed that it was not the denied fact that
right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution includes a
right to clean water. This right to clean water being deprived to 31.8
million citizens of Delhi because of the large scale pollution of the
river Yamuna. The entire pollution takes place only in the stretch of
the river Yamuna that passes through Delhi which is about 22 km. The
quality of water of river Yamuna, when it enters in Delhi, is far
superior than when it leaves Delhi and by the time Yamuna enters
into Agra canal. The Hon’ble Court further directed that when an
Integrated Action Plan was furnished, steps might be taken so as to
ensure that at least by 31.3.2003 the minimum desired water quality
(i.e. of class-C) in the river Yamuna is achieved in Delhi Stretch. The
Hon’ble Supreme Court further directed the Ministry of Urban
Development to submit how its Integrated Action Plan could be
implemented within the prescribed time frame. The Chief Secretary
of Delhi would also inform this Court as what steps could be taken to
ensure to attain the required quality of water in the river Yamuna so
that it could no longer be called “Mailee Yamuna” after 31.3.2003.

The Hon’ble Court on 6.11.2001 while considering the status of

pollution in the river Yamuna observed that the deterioration of water
quality became a serious health hazard for the inhabitants of Delhi.
The Government with all the resources at their command should
ensure that unpolluted water or tolerable standard of water was
maintained. The Hon’ble Court directed the Delhi Administration to
submit a time schedule as to what it would propose to do and also
indicate the phases in which the pollution level will come down to
ensure that after 31st March, 2003 no untreated sewage enters river
Yamuna.
 The Hon’ble Court on 4.12.2001 directed that the Government
should not allow construction of additional floor or increase FAR
without increasing the corresponding civic amenities because any
such addition in the construction would increase population and the
extinction of the river Yamuna. The Hon’ble Court further directed
the Central Government to consider and inform the Court whether
any amendment is required of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
so that the requirement of Environment Impact Assessment for the
purposes of the town planning is incorporated.

Distilleries Matters
The Hon’ble Court considered the petitions filed by the
Distilleries located in Haryana on 23.1.2001 and directed that a
committee comprising Additional Secretary, Ministry of Environment
& Forests or such other senior officer as may be deputed by the
Ministry and the Chairmen of Central Pollution Control Board and
Haryana State Pollution Control Board be constituted and the said
Committee, should take decision with regard to allowing all or any of
the distilleries to operate or not to operate. The said Committee
might seek such technical assistance, as it may deem fit and proper.
Accordingly, the Committee consulted experts who were well
acquainted with the distilleries and its effluent treatment, to evolve
criteria for treatment and disposal of distillery wastewater. Some of
the distilleries in Haryana were allowed to operate after compliance
of this criteria developed by the Committee.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court vide its order, dated July 29, 1997 in I.A.
No. 2 & 9-11 in WP (C)No. 1056/90 inter-alia directed the Central
Pollution Control Board to take up the following activities :

A. CPCB was to assess the following :

i) capacity of Common Effluent Treatment Plants (CETPs)
installed at Patancheru and Bollaram;
ii) functioning of these CETPs;
iii) extent of treatment carried out in the CETPs;
 iv) whether the discharge from these CETPs meet the
pollution control standards of CPCB;
v) extent of the areas damaged around the industries as a
result of discharge of effluent from industries;
vi) extent of such damage;
vii) whether individual units have complete effluent treatment
plants or only primary treatment is provided to the
effluents; and
viii) The quality of effluent discharged from the individual
effluent treatment plants belonging to each of these
industries and whether they meet the prescribed
standards.
B. The Hon’ble Court further directed CPCB to suggest:
i) Steps which should be taken to restore the affected areas
to their non-polluted conditions;
ii) Steps which were required to be taken for proper
functioning of the two CETPs, known as `Progressive
Effluent Treatment Limited’ (PETL), Bollaram and
`Patancheru Envirotech Limited (PETL)’, Patancheru;
iii) The time frame within which these steps can be taken;
iv) CPCB to deal comprehensively the entire problem and
suggest some measures as they think appropriate for
rectifying the situation; and
v) CPCB, in their report, to mention about the industries
which have their own effluent treatment plants, indicating
whether it was a complete plant or whether it was only for
primary treatment of effluents

The CPCB conducted detailed investigations in the Bollaram

and Patancheru areas and submitted a comprehensive report of
effluent management in Nakkawagu drainage basin to the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in March 1998. Vide its report the Central Board
suggested mechanism of self-regulations of member industries to
Patancheru and Bollaram Common Effluent Treatment Plants. The
CPCB has suggested the following inlet standards for CETP so that
the effluent received in the CETP are amenable for biological
treatment.

Parameters Desirable limit (not to Maximum Allowable

exceed) Limit

COD 15000 mg/l 20000 mg/l

TDS 15000 mg/l 20000 mg/l

SS 1000 mg/l 1000 mg/l

pH 6.5 – 8.5 6.5 – 8.5

CPCB also suggested norms for the discharge of treated

effluent for individual industries (large) and also the following norms
for treated effluents from the CETP.

Parameters Disposal to Disposal to Disposal to

Nakkavaagu with land for sewer
cunnette system afforestation

pH 6.5-8.5 5.5-9.0 5.5-9.0

O&G 10 mg/l 10 mg/l 20 mg/l

BOD 100 mg/l 150 mg/l 350 mg/l

TDS 3000 mg/l 3000 mg/l -

The CPCB further dealt with the problem of disposal of the

treated effluents from these CETPs and suggested the following four
options and also given an Inter-comparison of various options.

Option I: In this option, large industries should treat their effluent to

bring down BOD to 1000 mg/l and following norms of
TDS, COD, SS as discussed earlier discharge their effluent
 to CETP. CETP would also receive the effluent from SSI
units meeting the norms of COD & TDS and should collect
sewage from local areas/sewer network. CETP must
achieve the sewer standard and discharge treated effluent
to main sewer which leads to sewage treatment plant.

Option II: In option II, the same rule for option I was applicable to
industries both large and small, along with collection of
sewage. However, instead of disposal to sewer, CETP
effluent would be discharged to land for afforestation,
under this option.

Option III: The same proposition with respect to the provision of

industrial effluent at individual level as sewage collection
from local area holds good, but here CETP effluent
disposal to Isakavaagu/Nakkavaagu with cunnette system
was suggested.

Option IV: In this option, large industries were allowed to discharge

into Isakavaagu/Nakkavaagu with a stringent limit of BOD
300 mg/l, COD 250 mg/l and TDS 2100 mg/l. Of course,
the drains have to be providing with cunnette. Incase of
SSI, effluent would be treated at CETP and discharged to
Isakavaagu/Nakkavaagu drain.

Orders given by the court to CPCB for finding the causes of pollution

In response to the directions of the Hon'ble High Court of

Punjab and Haryana, CPCB carried out detailed survey of polluting
sources of Western Yamuna Canal. The survey results reveal the
following facts.

• The Yamuna River, Western Yamuna Canal (WJC) and Upper

Ganga Canal are the main sources of water supply in Delhi.
During last few years, the Delhi Water Supply authorities have
been reporting frequent deterioration of raw water quality at
Haidarpur and Nangloi water works. Looking to the seriousness
of the problem, a team of CPCB conducted a detailed survey of
 the catchment of Western Yamuna Canal in Panipat and Yamuna
Nagar to find out main polluting sources and cause of
seriousness and pollution level in Western Yamuna Canal, up-
stream of Delhi.

• There are a large number of industries located in the catchment

of Western Yamuna Canal. Yamuna Nagar town is discharging
highly deteriorated mixed wastewater (industrial + domestic)
into Western Yamuna Canal, which is presently not operated for
irrigation purpose. The high concentration of TSS (158 mg/l),
BOD (190 mg/l) and Ammonia Nitrogen (30.5 mg/l) were
measured. This wastewater at Jamla Khurdi (about 11 km
downstream) and at Dhanaura Escape (about 22 km
downstream from Yamuna Nagar) re-generating its quality and
concentration of TSS and BOD indicating reducing trend. This is
due to TSS and inert COD were settled down with low water
current in Western Yamuna Canal. From Dhanaura Escape,
wastewater is partly diverted and discharged into Yamuna
River and rest is accumulating in this 22 km stretch of disused
Western Yamuna Canal. The contribution of total TSS and BOD
load from Yamuna Nagar is 23.4 and 28.5 tonnes/day
respectively. Sewage treatment plants (STP`s) of Yamuna Nagar
is highly contributing Ammonia -N and it is estimated that the
4.5 tones per day Ammonia -N is being added into disused
Western Yamuna canal. The above pollution load is being
contributed for about 25 days, as the canal is not being used for
irrigation purpose. It is estimated that the 3700 million liter of
wastewater is being accumulated during this period, which is
flushed into the main Canal whenever there is a release of 1504
cusecs of freshwater from Dadupur Headworks.
 POINTS GIVEN BY JAL BIRADARI

Jal Biradari requested the government to fulfill some of the

requirements which were related to the environment protection act
and certain laws have to be enforced by the government by 2nd
October, 2007. These laws and regulations were

1. It told the government that the Environment Ministry which was

working for the protection of rivers to implement the River
Regulation Zone act which is for the legal protection of rivers.

2. In the rule of Environment management plan for river

rejuvenation of river Yamuna N.C.T 2005 it was requested from
the government that not to allow any construction near the
banks of river Yamuna.

In the case of land of “Khel Gaon” according to the Delhi

Development Law 1957 there was a notice to be passed in the public
asking for any objection against its conversion as it was for the
public interest because the matter of safety was related to it. But, no
such kind of public hearing or notice was raised to take the
permission by the government.

PIL ON YAMUNA - MONITORING COMMITTEE SOUGHT

DEMOLITUON OF PROPOSED GAMES VILLAGE

In an unprecedented move, the convener of the Yamuna

(removal of encroachments) Monitoring Committee has sought
demolition of all permanent structures erected in the Yamuna
riverbed by the Delhi Development Authority and the Delhi Metro
Rail Corporation.

In a report submitted to the High Court, retired additional

district and sessions judge S.M. Aggarwal, the convener of the
committee, has also sought that DDA and DMRC should be penalized
for damaging the river's eco-system by undertaking construction of
the massive Metro rail yard, a residential complex in 1.85 acres of the
river bed, a huge Games Village Metro station along with a mall by
Parsvanath Developers and the Commonwealth Games Village.

The report has also recommended exemplary action against the

Vice Chairman of DDA for deliberate and willful violation of Delhi
High Court order directing that the river bed be maintained as a
water body or wetland by the DDA and all other authorities.

The Yamuna Monitoring Committee headed by retired High

Court Judge Justice Usha Mehra, was set up on December 8, 2005 to
monitor the removal of all unauthorized structures, jhuggis, places of
worship and or any other structure, which are unauthorized put in
Yamuna bed and its embankments.

The committee submitted the report in the court of Justice A.K.

Sikri and Justice Rekha Sharma on Tuesday when they were hearing a
public interest petition filed by well-known water activist Rajender
Singh, Yamuna Jiye Abhiyaan, other NGOs and resident fronts. The
environmental activists have sought immediate stay on construction
in the Yamuna river bed and arguments on this count will be heard
on November 20.

Sheila Dixit, Chief Minister of National Capital Region also took

part in the cleaning exercise. Although P K Tripathi, the chief
executive officer Delhi Jal Board confessed recently that the Supreme
court deadline to stop untreated sewage water from entering Yamuna
cannot be enforced because our Sewage Treatment Plants (STP) and
Effluent Treatment Plants (ETP) cannot treat human waste and several
other contaminants.

Earlier, the Supreme Court had directed the Delhi Government

to file an affidavit assuring the Court that by March 2003 no untreated
sewage water would enter the Yamuna River on 6 November, 2002. A
three-Judge Bench comprising Mr. Justice B.N. Kirpal, Mr. Justice
K.G. Balakrishnan and Mr. Justice Arijit Pasayat had said, the
parameters laid down by the Government itself was not being
followed. They had expressed concern over the deterioration of
water quality resulting in a serious health hazard to the inhabitants of
Delhi.

The Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) submitted that

there had been no improvement in the water quality of the river for
the past two to three years. It said the coliform, permissible level
which is 5,000 per 100 milliliter as per the national standard, was
exceeding seven crore in number at Nizamuddin though the same
was only 7,600 when the river entered Delhi at Palla. Of the coliform,
the deadly faecal coliform counted up to 1 crore 41 lakh per 100 ml at
Nizamuddin though as per standards no faecal coliform should be
present.

The Bench had said it was for the government to decide how
this was to be achieved and to ensure and direct that the parameters
lay down in the statutes with respect to the quality of water were
implemented. It had asked the Delhi Administration to file an affidavit
within two weeks giving the time schedule for what it proposed to do
so that by March 2003 no untreated sewage would enter the Yamuna.

Even as residents seek permanent measures to improve the

situation and CPCB says the quality of water in Yamuna continues to
deteriorate, Delhi chief minister says, she has noticed visible
reduction in the levels of solid waste discharged in the river. Only
making restraining polluting industries and improving the sewage
system in the city, which is in absolute disarray, can clean up the
river. Several programmes under the Yamuna Action Plan still remain
unfulfilled.
 STEPS ALREADY TAKEN

With the recent awareness towards the water pollution, Delhi

government has finally woken up. It has launched a massive drive to
plant trees along with the catchment area to prevent the erosion of
the loose soil. Near about 20,000 sapling are already planted till 2001
and there is a target of 60,000 saplings. These plants not only help to
sustain the soil they work as carbon sink for the city also. This will
surely improve the poor air quality of Delhi. In a recent development,
Supreme Court has banned the discharge of any effluent by Delhi
and Haryana industries. Delhi government has also set up a vigilance
squad to monitor these industries. Delhi pollution control committee
(DPCC) issues notices to additional 800 industries for polluting the
river. A Yamuna purification drive was launched by Public health
department in which 15 cities are actively involved. In this drive the
first thing was to control the raw sewage into the river. There are 11
treatment plants along 83 km long sewer line. These have helped in
the reduction of pollution level from 200 mg/l to 30mg/l. Clearly,
there is a lot of activity to improve the quality of Yamuna water. In
spite of all these efforts, it will be quite some time before we see
Yamuna again in its former glory.

Serious incidents resulting from spillages or discharges of toxic

chemicals are the pollution events that make the news. For example,
just one liter of insecticide killed over 1,000 fish in the River Glaven
in Norfolk, UK. Similar incidents keep on happening in many Indian
rivers. In a recent incidence, hundreds of fishes were found floating
dead in Sutlej river in Punjab. Along with fish many species of fish
eating birds like Darters, Cormorants, Storks, kingfishers and various
exotic ducks as well as mammals such as otters are involuntary
sufferers. The impact of a slow build-up of pollution over a long time
and in a wide area can be even more serious. Unfortunately in most
of Indian cities, toxic discharge by industries, Hospitals and such
other organizations is simply dumped into any nearby water body.
Thus government of India should enforce stringent regulations of
toxic discharge into rivers. Even though there are laws to protect the
Indian rivers, most of people do not know about them. In 1976, when
the Indian parliament passed the 42nd amendment to its constitution
safeguarding the environment, it became the first country in the
world to do so. The amendment was to “endeavor to protect and
improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of
the country.” It imposes a duty on every Indian citizen “to protect and
improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers, and
wild life, and to have compassion for living creatures.” According to
the Environment Protection Act of 1986, Environment is that which
includes the “inter-relationship which exists among and between
water, air, and land and human beings, other living creatures, plants,
microorganism and property.” Essentially, The Water (Prevention &
Control) Act, 1974 can be considered to be truly the first regulations.
It has been amended many times since then.