Taj Trapezium Case [M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India & Ors]
🏛️ Taj Trapezium Case
(M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & Others, 1996)
📌 Background
Petitioner: M.C. Mehta (noted environmental lawyer and activist)
Respondents: Union of India and various industries
Court: Supreme Court of India
Main Concern:
Deterioration and yellowing of the Taj Mahal’s white marble due to air pollution, especially from industries in and around Agra.
📍 What is the Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ)?
A 10,400 sq. km area around the Taj Mahal covering five districts in Uttar Pradesh.
Encompasses environmentally sensitive areas, including:
Taj Mahal
Agra Fort
Fatehpur Sikri (UNESCO heritage sites)
🔍 Issues Raised in the Petition
Air Pollution:
From Mathura Oil Refinery and nearby industries emitting Sulphur Dioxide (SO₂) and other pollutants causing acid rain.
Industrial Emissions:
Over 292 industries, including foundries, chemical plants, brick kilns, were using coal and coke, contributing to pollution.
Damage to the Taj Mahal:
The pollutants were corroding the marble, turning it yellow, and causing irreversible damage.
⚖️ Key Legal Principles Invoked
Article 21 – Right to a healthy environment as part of the Right to Life
Article 48A – Directive Principle for protection of the environment
Article 51A(g) – Fundamental duty to protect and improve the natural environment
Public Trust Doctrine
Polluter Pays Principle
Precautionary Principle
🧾 Supreme Court Judgment – 1996
Delivered by Justice Kuldip Singh
✅ Major Directions Issued:
Ban on Coal/Coke Usage:
Over 200 industries were ordered to switch from coal/coke to cleaner fuel like natural gas (CNG or LPG).
Relocation or Closure:
Industries that did not comply were ordered to shut down or relocate outside the TTZ.
Development of Green Belt:
Directed the creation of a green buffer zone around the Taj Mahal to curb pollution.
Public Transport Upgrade:
Encouraged use of non-polluting vehicles and public transport in Agra.
Monitoring Committees:
Authorities like the Pollution Control Board and Ministry of Environment were tasked with regular monitoring.
Pollution Control Measures:
Installation of pollution-control devices and strict regulation of brick kilns.
🏆 Significance of the Judgment
Pioneering Environmental Action:
First time the court took such sweeping action to protect a national monument.
Strengthened Environmental Jurisprudence:
Reinforced the idea that cultural heritage is part of the environment and must be preserved under Article 21.
Accountability for Industrial Pollution:
Set a precedent for holding industries accountable and balancing economic development with heritage protection.
Public Trust Doctrine:
The state acts as a trustee of natural and cultural resources, and must act in public interest.
❗ Criticisms and Challenges
Relocation Impact:
Industrial workers and businesses faced hardships due to relocation and compliance costs.
Enforcement Issues:
Long-term compliance and enforcement have been uneven.
Continued Pollution:
Despite orders, environmental concerns around the Taj remain due to rising vehicular and urban pollution.
📚 Conclusion
The Taj Trapezium Case remains a landmark judgment in Indian environmental law, highlighting:
Judicial activism for environmental and heritage protection
Application of constitutional principles to ecological preservation
Integration of sustainable development into legal discourse
It continues to influence environmental litigation and policymaking in India.
RELATED Blog
0 comments