Read Time: 06 minutes

Allowing a writ petition which sought directions to the State officials to not allow any encroachments or make any constructions on a tank bed of a village, Andhra Pradesh High Court on Wednesday held that while allowing the public property to a third party, the State has to keep in mind its consequences on the environment and the obligation of the State under the Indian Constitution to keep up the heritage and culture.

The Bench of Justice M.Satyanarayana Murthy held,

“It seems fit to hold that merely asserting an intention for development will not be enough to sanction the destruction of local ecological resources.”

Reiterating several judgements of the Apex Court, the court added,

“What this Court should follow is a principle of sustainable development and finds a balance between the developmental needs which the respondents assert, and the environmental degradation, that the appellants allege.”

Court also reiterated the ‘Doctrine of Public Trust’ which was though in existence from Roman times, but was enunciated in its modern form by the US Supreme Court in Illinois Central Railroad Company v. People of the State of Illinois. The Doctrine implies that the bed or soil of navigable waters is held by the people of the State in their character as sovereign, in trust for public uses for which they are adapted.

Stressing that sustainable development is the need of the hour, the court said,

“In order to maintain balance between development and environment, the principle of sustainable development which encompasses the precautionary principle must be followed while envisaging a project.”

The court added that this would prevent any anticipated environmental impact a project may have by following and incorporating mitigating measures.

“Right from the stage of selection of site, to adopting efficient and environmental friendly measures at each stage and facet of construction to avoid or minimize environment de-gradation, to providing mitigatory measures and monitoring the impact of a project on the environment/eco-system and thereafter providing for restorative action in case of any degradation is imperative in today’s pro-environment climate and is also the need of the hour,” the Bench highlighted.  

Noting that while the Constitution does not specifically recognize a fundamental right to water, court said that however, court decisions deem such a right to be implied in Article 21.

Court also took note of the issue of conversion of the farmlands and stated,

“Conversions of farmland and forests to urban development reduce the amount of open space and environmental amenities for local residents.”

Allowing the petitioners’ prayers, the Court directed the officials to take steps to remove encroachments of water body holding the action of allowing the presently proposed construction illegal, arbitrary, without any authority of law.

(Case Title: Mula Maheswara Rao and another v. The State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors.)