In INDIAN COUNCIL FOR ENVIRO-LEGAL ACTION v. UNION OF INDIA, (1996) 3 SCC 212 (BICHHRI village case), the Supreme Court:
Answer & Solution
Correct answer: A.
1. In ICELA v. UoI (Bichhri case, 1996), the Supreme Court addressed pollution by chemical industries in Bichhri village, Rajasthan, where untreated effluents had contaminated soil and groundwater.
2. The Court applied the POLLUTER PAYS PRINCIPLE and directed: (i) the polluting industries to bear the cost of remedial measures; (ii) the cost of restoration of the environment to original state; (iii) compensation to victims for damage.
3. The Court explicitly held that 'the polluter is liable to pay the costs of restoration of the affected area and to pay compensation to those who suffered.'
4. Hence option B is correct.
_Source: EPA 1986 / Constitution of India / Stockholm/Rio/Paris / Indian SC environmental jurisprudence — Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India, (1996) 3 SCC 212 (Bichhri case)_
Related questions
The PLASTIC WASTE MANAGEMENT RULES 2016 (as amended in 2022) prohibit:The SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT RULES 2016 require segregation of waste at SOURCE into:Under the BIO-MEDICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT RULES 2016 (notified under EPA 1986), the segregatiThe 'PRINCIPLE OF EQUITY' in international environmental law (intra-generational and interThe NATIONAL DISASTER MANAGEMENT ACT 2005 establishes the NDMA (National Disaster ManagemeThe Wildlife (Protection) Amendment Act 2022 introduced significant changes to the 1972 AcThe TIGER RESERVE under Section 38V Wildlife Protection Act 1972 (inserted by 2006 AmendmeSection 23 EPA 1986 enables the Central Government to DELEGATE its powers under the Act to