The statement "The most significant achievement of modern law in India is the constitutionalisation of environmental problems by the Supreme Court" refers to the way in which the Supreme Court of India has used its powers to interpret and apply the Constitution of India to address environmental issues. Some of the ways in which the Supreme Court has done this are:
Expanding the scope of Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, to include the right to a wholesome environment. The Supreme Court has held that the right to life encompasses the right to live with human dignity, which includes the right to food, water, shelter, health and a decent environment.
Applying the principles of sustainable development, precautionary principle and polluter pays principle as part of the constitutional mandate to protect and improve the environment. The Supreme Court has held that these principles are essential for balancing economic growth and environmental protection, and that they impose a duty on the state and citizens to prevent environmental harm and compensate for any damage caused.
Importing international norms and standards of environmental law into Indian law, such as the Stockholm Declaration, the Rio Declaration, the Convention on Biological Diversity, etc. The Supreme Court has held that these norms are part of the constitutional obligation under Article 51 of the Constitution, which requires the state to foster respect for international law and treaty obligations.
Developing new doctrines and remedies for environmental justice, such as public interest litigation, absolute liability, environmental impact assessment, environmental audit, etc. The Supreme Court has held that these doctrines and remedies are necessary for ensuring access to justice for environmental victims and for enforcing environmental laws effectively.
One significant example of the Supreme Court's role in constitutionalizing environmental issues is the landmark case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, also known as the "Oleum Gas Leak Case." In this case, the Supreme Court addressed the issue of industrial pollution and its impacts on the environment and public health. The Supreme Court laid down several important principles and directions in this case, such as:
The principle of absolute liability for hazardous or inherently dangerous activities, which means that an enterprise engaged in such activities is liable to compensate for any harm caused by them, regardless of any fault or negligence on its part.
The principle of deep pocket compensation, which means that an enterprise engaged in hazardous or inherently dangerous activities must bear the social cost of its operations, and that compensation must be adequate and proportional to the magnitude and capacity of the enterprise.
The direction to establish an authority under Article 32 of the Constitution, with power to issue directions for closure, prohibition or regulation of any industry or activity causing environmental pollution or degradation.
The direction to shift hazardous or inherently dangerous industries from densely populated areas to safer zones within a specified time frame.
Thus, it can be seen that the constitutionalisation of environmental problems by the Supreme Court is a significant achievement of modern law in India, as it has contributed to the protection and promotion of environmental rights, values and interests in India.