According to Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, all Indian citizens have the basic right to engage in any profession or business, trade or commerce anywhere in India. However, this is not an absolute right, so you have reasonable restrictions. Article 19, clause 6 of the Constitution imposes appropriate restrictions on this fundamental right to avoid environmental hazards. The purpose of this is to avoid environmental imbalances and atmospheric deterioration carried by trade, business, occupation. One is thus not permitted to cause harm to the environment on the mere reason of carrying any trade, business or profession.
In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, some tanneries dumped sewage into the sacred Ganga, causing water pollution. In addition, despite constant reminders, sanitation facilities have not been established. The court closed the tannery because sewage was ten times more harmful than the normal sewage flowing into the water. At the same time, the court decided to stop the work of the tannery because they did not take the necessary measures to pre-treat the industrial wastewater. This may be due to the closure of the tannery, but health, life and environment are more important before the law.
In S. Jagannath v. Union of India, sea beaches and sea coasts were considered to be the gifts of nature, by the Hon’ble supreme court and any such activity which pollutes these natural resources or the gift of nature cannot be permitted to function. In this case, a shrimp farming culture industry by modern method causing degradation to the ecosystem, discharge of polluting effluents, polluting the potable ground-water and depletion of the plantation. All of these activities were held to be violative of constitutional provisions and other legislation dealing with environmental matters, by the court. The court further held that before the installation of any such industry in a fragile coastal area it is essential for them to necessarily pass the strict environmental test. In other words, reasonable restrictions can be laid in accordance with Article 19(6) of the Constitution.
 M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1988 SC 1037.
 S. Jagannath v. Union of India 1997 2 SCC 87.
I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.
If you are interested in participating in the same, do let me know.
Do follow me on Facebook, Twitter Youtube and Instagram.
The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.
If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at email@example.com
We also have a Facebook Group Restarter Moms for Mothers or Women who would like to rejoin their careers post a career break or women who are enterpreneurs.
We are also running a series Inspirational Women from January 2021 to March 31,2021, featuring around 1000 stories about Indian Women, who changed the world. #choosetochallenge
Leave a Reply