Appoint experts, not people close to power, in pollution control board: SC to states
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has slammed the state governments for their "casual and chalta hai " attitude towards environment protection and controlling pollution by not appointing people with professional expertise in State Pollution Control Boards(SPCBs) and preferring those who were close to powers.
A bench of Justices Madan B Lokur and Deepak Gupta said that it was the constitutional obligation of the governments to preserve environment, but their attitude for appointing professionals and experts to the SPCBs had been "remarkably casual". It directed the states to frame guidelines or recruitment rules for chairman and members of SPCBs within six months to ensure that professionals and experts are appointed in the Boards.
"Why is it important to be more than careful in making such appointments? There can be no doubt that the protection and preservation of the environment is extremely vital for all of us and unless this responsibility is taken very seriously, particularly by the state governments and the SPCBs, we are inviting trouble that will have adverse consequences for future generations. Issues of sustainable development, public trust and inter-generational equity are not mere catchwords, but are concepts of great importance in environmental jurisprudence," the bench said.
The court passed the order on a batch of petitions filed by various state governments challenging National Green Tribunal order restraining chairmen of ten State Pollution Control Boards from discharging their duties after the governments failed to frame regulation for appointment.
Although the apex court set aside the order saying that NGT had no jurisdiction to pass such order, it agreed with the anxiety expressed by the tribunal towards careless approach of states towards environment protection.
"It is this chalta hai attitude that led the NGT to direct the state governments to consider examining the appointment of the Chairperson and members in the SPCBs and determining whether their appointment deserves continuation or cancellation...While we appreciate the anxiety of the NGT to preserve and protect the environment as a part of its statutory functions, we cannot extend these concepts to the extent of enabling the NGT to consider who should be appointed as a Chairperson or a member of any SPCB or who should not be so appointed," the bench said.
Expressing concern, the court said that it was unfortunate that SPCBs continued to be manned by persons who did not have the necessary expertise or professional experience to deal with pollution issues and were appointed in violation of recommendations made by various committees and judgements of courts emphasising the need to appoint experts."The concern really is not one of a lack of professional expertise - there is plenty of it available in the country - but the lack of dedication and willingness to take advantage of the resources available and instead benefit someone close to the powers that be. With this couldn't-care-less attitude, the environment and public trust are the immediate casualties. It is unlikely that with such an attitude, any substantive effort can be made to tackle the issues of environment degradation and issues of pollution," it said.
"It is quite clear that apart from the natural law obligation to protect and preserve the environment, there is also a constitutional obligation to do so. Unfortunately, despite this, our society has been witnessing over the last few decades, to repeated onslaughts against the environment, sometimes in the name of development and sometimes because our society just does not seem to care," it said.
A bench of Justices Madan B Lokur and Deepak Gupta said that it was the constitutional obligation of the governments to preserve environment, but their attitude for appointing professionals and experts to the SPCBs had been "remarkably casual". It directed the states to frame guidelines or recruitment rules for chairman and members of SPCBs within six months to ensure that professionals and experts are appointed in the Boards.
"Why is it important to be more than careful in making such appointments? There can be no doubt that the protection and preservation of the environment is extremely vital for all of us and unless this responsibility is taken very seriously, particularly by the state governments and the SPCBs, we are inviting trouble that will have adverse consequences for future generations. Issues of sustainable development, public trust and inter-generational equity are not mere catchwords, but are concepts of great importance in environmental jurisprudence," the bench said.
The court passed the order on a batch of petitions filed by various state governments challenging National Green Tribunal order restraining chairmen of ten State Pollution Control Boards from discharging their duties after the governments failed to frame regulation for appointment.
Although the apex court set aside the order saying that NGT had no jurisdiction to pass such order, it agreed with the anxiety expressed by the tribunal towards careless approach of states towards environment protection.
"It is this chalta hai attitude that led the NGT to direct the state governments to consider examining the appointment of the Chairperson and members in the SPCBs and determining whether their appointment deserves continuation or cancellation...While we appreciate the anxiety of the NGT to preserve and protect the environment as a part of its statutory functions, we cannot extend these concepts to the extent of enabling the NGT to consider who should be appointed as a Chairperson or a member of any SPCB or who should not be so appointed," the bench said.
Y
Expressing concern, the court said that it was unfortunate that SPCBs continued to be manned by persons who did not have the necessary expertise or professional experience to deal with pollution issues and were appointed in violation of recommendations made by various committees and judgements of courts emphasising the need to appoint experts."The concern really is not one of a lack of professional expertise - there is plenty of it available in the country - but the lack of dedication and willingness to take advantage of the resources available and instead benefit someone close to the powers that be. With this couldn't-care-less attitude, the environment and public trust are the immediate casualties. It is unlikely that with such an attitude, any substantive effort can be made to tackle the issues of environment degradation and issues of pollution," it said.
"It is quite clear that apart from the natural law obligation to protect and preserve the environment, there is also a constitutional obligation to do so. Unfortunately, despite this, our society has been witnessing over the last few decades, to repeated onslaughts against the environment, sometimes in the name of development and sometimes because our society just does not seem to care," it said.
No comments:
Post a Comment