Tag: #Article48A

S.no	Contents
1.	Introduction
2.	Types of Hazardous Wastes
3.	Legislator Framework in India
4.	Regulatory Framework in India
5.	Ineffectiveness of Law
6.	Case Laws of Hazardous Wastes
7.	Conclusion

Abstract

This article aims to present an overview of hazardous waste and types of hazardous waste. Further it explain the legislative and regulatory framework in India and after that ineffectiveness of the Law.

Introduction

Human beings always create waste materials which are produced by daily to daily life activities. Activities like washing utensils, washing the floor and sewage water.

Hazardous waste means “danger”. Hazardous waste is very dangerous for our life. Hazardous waste includes so many wastes like harmful medicines, harmful chemicals and harmful industrial waste. Hazardous waste affects our lives in so many ways our skin gets irritated, our eyes become red, breathing rate problems and hair problems create. Pesticides are also included in hazardous waste.

Hazardous waste is very toxic for us and hazardous waste creates so many diseases. Hazardous waste is created by pesticides, pharmaceuticals, and industrial and commercial areas. Hazardous waste means any material that is potentially catastrophic to the environment or human health. This type of waste includes chemicals, toxins, flammable materials, and radioactive substances. Hazardous waste can come from a variety of sources, including industrial processes, medical facilities, and households.

The proper handling and disposal of hazardous waste are crucial to prevent harm to humans and the environment. When not handled properly, hazardous waste can contaminate water, soil, and air, leading to serious health problems, including cancer, birth defects, and neurological disorders.

To reduce the amount of hazardous waste generated, it is important to implement practices such as reducing the use of hazardous materials, reusing products when possible, and recycling. In addition, it is essential to properly label and store hazardous waste and to dispose of it in a safe and environmentally friendly manner.

Types of Hazardous Wastes

There are four classifications of hazardous wastes are as follows –
F-list waste
K-list waste
P-list waste
U-list waste

F-LIST WASTE –
It is a classification of hazardous waste. It doesn’t come from a specific industry. It comes from a mix industry. We didn’t identify the industry of F-waste.

F-list waste includes –
Dioxin-bearing wastes
Wood-preserving wastes
Chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons
Spent solvent wastes

K-LIST WASTE –
After the F-list, we read about the k-list. K-list waste is more specific than F-list. We identify the industry of k-list waste. The k-list waste came from industrial waste.

K-list waste includes –
Organic chemicals manufacturing
Primary aluminium production
Ink formulation
Petroleum refining

P-LIST WASTE –
After the K-list waste, we read about P-list. P-list waste is highly toxic. P-list wastes are unused and they are a part of commercial chemical products. Pesticides are part of the P-list.

U-LIST WASTE –
After the U-list waste, we read about U-list, U-list waste is less toxic as compared to the list. We use U-list waste properly so they are not hazardous for us but we do not use them properly so they are hazardous for us.

Legislator Framework in India

Human beings’ duty is to protect nature for natural resources for the future. In Constitution, Part IV-A ( Article 51-A fundamental duties ) says that every human being duty to protect nature against hazardous waste and any other kind of danger. Human beings use natural resources for the future so they have a responsibility to take care the nature.
Further, Part IV (Article 48A directive principles of State Policies) says that the state also has a duty to protect nature and take proper actions to protect nature.

State and human beings have equal responsibilities to protect nature. A well-developed framework came after the UN Conference on the Human Environment (Stockholm,1972). After the Stockholm Conference, the National Council for Environmental Policy and Planning was established in 1972 inside the Department of Science and Technology to introduce a regulatory body to look after environment-related issues. Later, This Council developed into an entire Ministry of Environment and Forests and Climate Change (MoEF & CL).

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates hazardous waste disposal through the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). This law establishes levels for the management of hazardous waste, consisting of essentials for its transportation, generation, storage, treatment, and disposal.

Businesses and organizations that generate hazardous waste must comply with RCRA regulations by obtaining permits and implementing proper waste management practices. Failure to obey these rules can result in fines and other penalties.

Regulatory Framework in India

The regulatory framework for hazardous waste varies by country, but in general, it involves a combination of national and international laws and regulations. Here are some key components of the regulatory framework for hazardous waste:

• National laws and regulations: Many countries have national laws and regulations that govern the generation, handling, transport, treatment, and disposal of hazardous waste. For example, in the United States, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) sets standards for the management of hazardous waste, while in the European Union, the Waste Framework Directive provides a framework for the management of waste, including hazardous waste.
• International conventions and agreements: Several international conventions and agreements have been established to address hazardous waste on a global scale. These consist of the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal, which monitors the current of hazardous waste between countries, and the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, which seeks to eliminate or restrict the use of persistent organic pollutants (POPs).
• Permitting and reporting requirements: Many countries require permits for facilities that generate, handle, treat, or dispose of hazardous waste. These permits may require facilities to meet certain standards for waste management and may include reporting requirements for the amount and type of waste generated.
• Enforcement mechanisms: Laws and regulations related to hazardous waste typically include enforcement mechanisms, such as fines, penalties, and criminal sanctions for non-compliance. In addition, regulatory agencies may conduct inspections and audits of facilities to ensure compliance with the regulations.
• Monitoring and tracking: Many countries have systems in place to monitor and track hazardous waste, from its generation to its final disposal. This may include the use of tracking manifests, electronic reporting systems, and inspections of waste transporters and disposal facilities.

Overall, the regulatory framework for hazardous waste is designed to protect human health and the environment by ensuring that hazardous waste is managed safely and responsibly. By implementing effective regulations and enforcing them consistently, countries can reduce the risks associated with hazardous waste and minimize its impact on the environment.

India has proper amendments about hazardous wastes are as follows –

• First Amendments Rules, 06.07.2016
  In the exercise of powers given by sections 6, 8 and 25 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 ( 29 of 1986), the Central Government hereby makes the following rules to amend the Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016, namely:-
  • These rules may be known as Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Amendment Rules, 2016.
  • They shall come into exercise on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.
• Second Amendments Rules, 28.02.2017
• Third Amendments Rules, 11.06.2018
• Fourth Amendments Rules, 01.03.2019
• Second Amendments Rules, 12.11.2021
• Sixth Amendments Rules, 21.07.2022

Ineffectiveness of Law

While there are laws and regulations in place to manage hazardous waste, there are still several factors that can lead to the ineffectiveness of these laws. Here are a few reasons why hazardous waste laws may be ineffective:

1. Inadequate enforcement: Even with strong regulations and penalties for non-compliance, the laws may not be effective if they are not enforced consistently and rigorously. Lack of funding, resources, and political will can all contribute to inadequate enforcement.
2. Loopholes and exemptions: Some hazardous waste laws may contain exemptions or loopholes that allow certain industries or activities to avoid compliance. For example, some laws may not apply to small businesses or may have less stringent requirements for certain types of waste.
3. Lack of transparency: In some cases, hazardous waste may be illegally dumped or transported without proper documentation or tracking. This can make it difficult to identify and hold responsible parties accountable for their actions.
4. Rapidly evolving technology and waste streams: Hazardous waste laws may not keep up with the rapid pace of technological innovation and changing waste streams. New types of waste and emerging technologies for waste management may not be adequately covered by existing laws, leaving gaps in regulation.
5. Limited international cooperation: Hazardous waste is a global problem, and effective regulation requires international cooperation and coordination. However, there may be limited cooperation between different countries and regions, leading to disparities in regulation and enforcement.

Overall, the effectiveness of hazardous waste laws depends on a range of factors, including enforcement, exemptions, transparency, technological innovation, and international cooperation. Addressing these issues can help to improve the effectiveness of hazardous waste regulation and protect human health and the environment.

Case Laws of Hazardous Wastes

• Love Canal (1970s): Love Canal was a neighbourhood in Niagara Falls, New York, where Hooker Chemical Company dumped 21,000 tons of toxic waste from the 1940s to the 1950s. In the 1970s, residents began experiencing health problems, and investigations revealed that the waste had contaminated the soil and groundwater. This led to the evacuation of the neighbourhood and the creation of the Superfund program, which provides funding for the cleanup of hazardous waste sites.
• Bhopal disaster (1984): The Bhopal disaster was a gas leak from a pesticide plant in Bhopal, India, owned by Union Carbide Corporation. The leak released toxic gas into the air, causing the deaths of over 3,000 people and injuring thousands more. The disaster highlighted the need for better safety regulations for hazardous industries and raised awareness of the environmental and human health impacts of hazardous waste.
• Koko Chemical Company (1988): Koko Chemical Company was a chemical company in Taiwan that illegally dumped hazardous waste, including PCBs, into the ocean. The waste contaminated the fish in the area, leading to a ban on fishing and a public health crisis. The company’s CEO was sentenced to life in prison, and the case led to increased scrutiny of hazardous waste management practices in Taiwan.
• Ivory Coast toxic waste dumping (2006): In 2006, a company called Trafigura chartered a ship to transport hazardous waste from Amsterdam to Ivory Coast. The waste was dumped illegally in various locations around Abidjan, the country’s largest city, leading to thousands of people reporting health problems. The incident prompted calls for stronger regulations on the transport and disposal of hazardous waste.

These cases illustrate the serious consequences that can arise from improper management and disposal of hazardous waste and highlight the importance of regulations and enforcement to protect human health and the environment.

Conclusion

Hazardous waste control by using windmills, solar energy and so many things come from nature so they produce less waste. We use natural things instead of made chemicals. Chemicals are full of toxicity. Chemicals are very dangerous for our life and animals also. Dogs and cats and so many animals are also in danger with us. Hazardous wastes are very dangerous for small children. Pregnant women and elders are also away from hazardous wastes. 

We take proper steps to get over this problem as follows – 

• We use natural things
• We don’t use plastic bags 
• Sewage waste 

In Delhi, a huge mountain is formed by waste so this is dangerous for our life. Due to this Ganga is also polluted and in festivals, we bathe in Ganga and do puja also due to the puja waste increase. Diya’s and flowers float in Ganga. We control this custom so that our future generation enjoy the fresh air and Ganga. We buy clothes so mindlessly due to this also waste is produced. We throw packets of milk, Maggi and lays in dustbin and we cannot cut properly so we cannot recycle these packets and they become waste. We mix wet waste and dry waste. We didn’t purchase clothes mindlessly and we cut the packets in a proper way so that we recycle them. 

Some clothes are not recyclable in nature so we cannot use or minimise the usage of that cloth. We didn’t mix the wet and dry waste so that waste is recyclable and that waste does not become hazardous waste. In the current scenario, waste is increasing day by day and they create threatening situations for us we cannot help us. Executive and legislative both make effective laws with sanction so that waste products is decreased. Pollution is created by waste. Pollution is also very bad for our health. 

Overall, it is important to understand the dangers associated with hazardous waste and to take steps to reduce its generation and properly manage and dispose of it. By doing so, we can protect human health and the environment for generations to come.

---

Reference

1. https://cpcb.nic.in/rules/

This article is written by Varsha Goel, a 2nd-year law student at Kurukshetra University.

CITATION OF THE CASE

Writ Petition (civil) 202 of 1995

DATE OF CASE

December 12, 1996

APPELLANT

T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad

RESPONDENT

Union of India & Ors

BENCH/JUDGES

Y.K. Sabharwal, Arijit Pasayat & S.H. Kapadia

STATUTES INVOLVED

Article 48A, Article 51A of The Constitution of India, Section 2 of forest conservation act.

INTRODUCTION

A writ request in the Supreme Court was recorded by T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad in 1995, to shield the Nilgiris woods land from deforestation by unlawful lumber activity. The incredible meaning of point associated with these issues, relating to insurance and preservation of woodland in the entire region. The court framed the assessment that this issue of backwoods security required a profundity hearing to see every one of the perspectives connected with public timberland strategy. Notwithstanding, it thought that couple of vital headings were needed regarding certain parts of the woods law the country over. The court gave specific itemized bearings for feasible utilization of timberland and directed the observing and execution framework through the country at various state-level networks controlling the utilization, recording, and development of wood the nation over in a perspective on assurance of public woodlands. The court even goes through every one of the parts of National Forest strategy the woods preservation act exhaustively to secure the backwoods.

T.N. Godavarman has expected a fundamental part concerning the protection and protection of the environment. He has different public interest cases to his advantage which oversee protection contemplations and concurring with nature. Normal law is a space of public significance that has been seen with the help of various NGOs and private affiliations. The zenith court has expected the piece of a driving force in safeguarding the natural concerns by articulating different achievement choices. This has prompted the development of an unheard-of level of the rule that began with absolute liability. As of now, it consolidates thoughts, for example, polluter pays rule, conservative development, and judicious rules.

BACKGROUND OF THE CASE

At the point of convergence of the contention is an extremely huge task of the Uttar Pradesh government at Noida. According to the candidates, the endeavor is a “gigantic unapproved development”. The applicants express that innumerable trees were hacked down to clear the ground for the assignment. These trees outlined a “woodland” as the term was deciphered by this Court in its solicitation dated December 12, 1996, in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad v. Association of India and Ors., (1997) 2 SCC 267 (1) and the action of the Uttar Pradesh Government in cleaving down a genuine woodland without the prior authorization of the Central Government and this Court, was in net encroachment of segment 2(ii) of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. The Central Empowered Committee CEC on a thought about the overall large number of materials made available to it, including the report of the FSI, held that the endeavor site was not a forest area or a considered forest or woodlands like the district similar to the solicitation for SC, fundamentally, because the trees in the endeavor locale that were cleaved down for representing the improvements were established trees and not ordinarily evolved trees, and because the area was neither exhorted as “forest area” nor recorded as “forest area” in the Government record. The Court held that the endeavor site isn’t woodlands land and the improvement of the assignment without the previous assent from the Central Government doesn’t in any way go against segment 2 of the FC Act.

FACTS OF THE CASE

By T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Association of India, the Supreme Court left behind the common occupation of an interpreter of the law. This milestone case is generally called ‘the Forest Case in India’ This is because there was a legal violation of the established command when the Supreme Court accepted command over the inquiries of this case. It was concerning the control and oversight of the woods of India. T.N. Godavarman halted a writ claim in the year 1995 in the summit court of India. The central target of the writ demand was to safeguard and secure the woodland place where there is the Nilgiris as it was mishandled through deforestation by unlawful lumber works out. The key component of this case was that it was to save the backwoods. It was trailed by a gathering at full length concerning the National Forest Policy.

This was seen as break orientation that was required in the material issue. This was to look at the necessity and execution of woodland laws and rules inside the subcontinent of India. The Supreme Court provided requests to use the timberland land and its resources financially. Moreover, told that it’s everything except a self-checking part at the same time. The court communicated that an execution system should be molded at the regional and state level. This
was to control the transportation of wood.

Godavarman Thirumulpad had numerous pundits. It deals with the regular honors of all and the intercession of the court. Just intercession or the encroachments of the court can be rehearsed exactly when they are required. Legitimate interventions happen when the state misses the mark in its commitment to work. The most prominent interventions made by the court recollect the blacklist for the tree felling, direct wood adventures, the forbiddance of mining in Kudremukh, and with Aravallis, the rule of sawmills. Most of the striking judgment on woods organization is the burden of obligation known as Present Value for the utilization of backwoods land for non-officer administration purposes, the underpinning of the Compensatory Afforestation Fund, or CAMPA, and henceforth the course of action of searching for previous support from the Supreme Court for any business activity. Subsequently, exclusive’s work to stop timberland annihilation in Gudalur incited a watershed legal intervention, which has fundamentally added to the assurance of forests. Godavarman Thirumulpad will remain inside legitimate history.

ISSUE RAISED BEFORE THE COURT

• Whether the new translation for Section 2 of the Forest Conservation Act and forest land is violative and regardless of whether the utilization of timber for business purposes is justified?
• The issue is regarding the determination of the environment and majorly damage to the forest which were wealthy in the natural resources begin with the expanding the needs of individual emerging because of a move to industrialization, migration to an urban area, need more land for cultivation housing and other purposes.

JUDGMENT

It is a fundamental circumstance of the environment especially of the climate. T.N. Godavaraman, understanding the circumstance of the backwoods and being a careful inhabitant of India, couldn’t as yet keep away from relying upon defying such illegal practices. He went to the Indian lawful leader searching for some help from the Supreme Court.

On 12 December 1996, a seat drove by Chief Justice J.S. Verma passed an interval request organizing that tree-felling and non-ranger service administration development in forestland the country over be ended. The way-breaking request redescribed the meaning of forestland and loosened up protection to all spaces with regular woods no matter what their proprietorship. It set out that ‘timberlands’ will be seen by its promise reference meaning and the arrangement of the Forest (Conservation) Act 1980, will apply to all thickly lush areas. States were composed to frame ace chambers to recognize backwoods as characterized and record reports. Senior Counsel Harish Salve was assigned Amicus Curie to help the Supreme Court. What followed was amazing. A couple of northeastern States, where backwoods were being assaulted by groups and unregulated sawmills worked straightforwardly, were shaken. A limitation on the advancement of illicit lumber was constrained. 94 rail route trucks of wrongfully sent wood were seized. At that stage, even the Supreme Court no doubt didn’t anticipate that the matter would be saved open for close to 20 years. However, luckily, it is alluded to in the set-up rule as the Writ of continuing with mandamus. More than 1,000 Interlocutory Applications have since been recorded, covering a scope of issues concerning boondocks protection, such as mining, tree-felling, the leaders of Protected Areas, and forest encroachment.

Considering the rising number of IAs and u thought of the issues being referred to, the court requested the constitution of a specialist body, the Central Empowered Committee (CEC), in May 2002. In September 2002 it was educated as a lawful leading body of legal administrators with wide-going powers to oversee impending IAs, hear new applications, and pass orders in consonance with those of the Supreme Court. Another perspective in the association of forests had been made. The omnibus backwoods case is at this point open yet under unique hearing any longer into its 20th year. The CEC continues, yet not as a legitimate warning gathering.

CONCLUSION

This case included the necessity for staying aware of and anticipating timberland helpfulness. It works with the assurance of organic variety. Similarly, safeguarding and getting biological conditions were discussed for the present circumstance. The consequence of the T.N. Godavarman v. Association of India and Ors notices the diminishing and the finish of different wood ventures. It moreover settled natural mindfulness among the occupants of India. It refused deforestation stringently. This case has gone probably as an improvement in environmental safeguarding and insurance for an enormous scope. The essential responsibility of this case was the powerful and smooth movement of various laws in doing natural activities.

References

1. T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 6 July, 2011. indiankanoon.org. [Online] https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1725193/.

Written by Sara Agrawal student at Sinhgad Law College, Pune.