Supreme Court: Tanneries Caused Irreversible Damage, Orders Polluters to Compensate

On Thursday, January 30, the Supreme Court issued a comprehensive set of directives aimed at addressing the severe environmental pollution caused by the unregulated discharge of untreated effluents from tanneries into the Palar River in Vellore District, Tamil Nadu. Recognizing the grave threat posed to both the ecosystem and public health, the Court emphasized the urgent need for stricter regulatory measures to curb industrial pollution and ensure the proper treatment of wastewater before its release into the river.

Notably, the Supreme Court directed that compensation be provided to the families affected by the pollution. It further ruled that the compensation should be recovered from the polluting industries in accordance with the "polluter pays" principle, ensuring that those responsible for environmental damage bear the cost of remediation. Additionally, the Court ordered the formation of an expert panel to thoroughly assess and audit the ecological damage caused by the discharge of untreated effluents and to recommend appropriate remedial measures to restore the affected environment.

A bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan, which delivered the judgment, emphasized that the issued directions fall under the category of a "continuing mandamus." This means that the Court will continue to monitor and review compliance with its orders at regular intervals. To ensure enforcement, the bench has scheduled the matter for periodic hearings and has directed the submission of a compliance report within four months. 

During the proceedings, Justice Pardiwala described the judgment as "pathbreaking" and issued a stern warning regarding non-compliance. He remarked that any violation of the Court’s directives would lead to strict consequences, stating: “Breach of any of these conditions, we will send them to Tihar Jail—not even any jail in Tamil Nadu. We will keep monitoring this case for as long as we are here.” This statement underscores the Court’s firm stance on environmental accountability and its commitment to ensuring that the directives are properly implemented.

In the operative part of the judgment, Justice Mahadevan said:

“The tanneries by discharging untreated or partially treated effluents into the river Palar and surrounding areas have resulted in irreversible damage to the waterbodies, groundwater and agricultural lands. This environmental degradation has impoverished local farmers and has caused human suffering to the local residents and the tannery workers thereby endangering public health and life. It is also abundantly clear that the discharges were neither authorised nor were as per the standards set by the Control Boards. Though the reports indicate that they have established a central effluent treatment plant and the industries have still not achieved zero levels...furthermore, the industries have not complied with the statutory guidelines framed by the Government as per the Appellant Vellore District Monitoring Committee. Considering all these factors, we deem it appropriate to issue certain directions.”

The Directions are as follows:

• The State Government is directed to pay compensation to all the affected families and individuals, if not already paid, in terms of the award dated March 7, 2001 and August 24, 2009, six weeks from today.

• The State Government is directed to recover the compensation amount from the polluters, if not recovered.

• The State Government in consultation with the Central Government shall within a period of four weeks shall constitute a committee under the chairmanship of a retired High Court judge and members comprising Secretaries of State and Central Departments, environmental experts, representatives of the affected communities and any other person deem if for the purpose of conducting an audit to maintain and create a clean and healthy environment in Vellore.

• The Committee shall carry out the following tasks and ensure its implementation until the damage caused is reversed.

• Pollution is a continuing work until the condition is reversed. Polluters shall be liable to compensate the victims and liable for the damages and the committee constituted is directed to periodically assess and pass appropriate orders.

• The State shall implement the suggestions of the Committee to cooperate and implement a comprehensive plan for the Palar river which includes removing pollutants and ensuring adequate water follow and direct the concerned authorities and bodies to accomplish the same within a time frame.

• Water inspection of tannery industries in the district to assess compliance with environmental regulations and publish a report disclosing all material particulars. The inspection team shall verify whether the industries are established within permissible distance from the prohibited zones.

• The State Pollution Control Board, Central Pollution Control Board shall in coordination with the State Government set emission standards for the tannieries industry in consonance with the international environmental standards and take into consideration the recommendation of the national and international regulatory bodies.

• Additionally, assess the possibility of imposing effluent charges which would be levied per unit of base/discharge release as a penal measure to ensure compliance.

• State Pollution Control Board shall establish platforms through which citizens can report pollution incidents and monitor the compliance.

• The licensing authority is permitted to cancel license not only for wrong or misrepresentation made to secure such license but also for violation of terms and conditions of such license and other applicable law.

The Supreme Court ordered that compensation be provided to affected families and individuals in accordance with the award issued by the Loss of Ecology (Prevention and Payment of Compensation) Authority, Tamil Nadu, on March 7, 2001. 

This award stemmed from the 1996 landmark judgment in Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India & Others, in which the Supreme Court had addressed concerns regarding water pollution and its devastating impact. The case sought compensation for victims, citing loss of lives, destruction of food crops, and environmental damage caused by industrial pollution.