Unit VIII · Topic 3Constitutional and legal framework for protection of environment in India – Previous Year Questions

103 previous year questions on Constitutional and legal framework for protection of environment in India from UGC NET Law papers (2012–2026), including 11 assertion–reason, 13 match-the-list questions. The correct option is marked in green.

Questions

103 questions

2012

Find the correct answer:

The principle of intergenerational equity envisages:

  1. (a)Conservation of options
  2. (b)Conservation of quality
  3. (c)Conservation of access
  4. (d)All the above✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : The principle of intergenerational equity states that every member of the present generation should collectively use the earth and ensure that future generations also have the same opportunity so that civilization is maintained. This principle considers the following:

(1) Conservation of options

(2) Conservation of quality

(3) Conservation of access

2012

Find the correct answer:

The Supreme Court allowed compensation of Rs. 23.84 lakhs and later allowed additional compensation of Rs. 47 lakhs to the farmers whose crops got damaged, being irrigated by subsoil water drawn from a stream which was polluted from untreated effluents of 22 industries. It was decided in the case of

  1. (a)Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India
  2. (b)Indian Council for Environment Action v. Union of India✓
  3. (c)S. Jagannath v. Union of India
  4. (d)Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : In the case of Indian Council for Environment Action v. Union of India, 1996 wy 281, the Supreme Court allowed compensation of Rs. 23.84 lakhs and later allowed additional compensation of Rs. 47 lakhs to the farmers. In this case, the water, crops, surroundings of villages of Udaypur district were affected by dangerous gases and chemicals from chemical factories nearby and about 720 tons of debris had spread around.

2012Assertion–Reason

Assertion (A): The Supreme Court in Banwasi Seva Ashram v. State of Uttar Pradesh, permitted the government agency to acquire the forest land, ousting certain tribal dwellers to implement a power project only after they agreed to provide certain facilities approved by the Court.

Reason (R): Because the governmental action had an environmental impact that threatened to dislocate poor forest dwellers and disrupt their life-style infringing their fundamental right to life, which include the right to livelihood.

Code:

  1. (a)(A) is true, but (R) is false
  2. (b)(A) and (R) are true and (R) is correct explanation of (A)
  3. (c)(A) is false, but (R) is true
  4. (d)(A) and (R) are true but (R) is not correct explanation of (A)✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : In the case of Banwasi Seva Ashram v. U.P. State, AIR 1987 S.C., the above statement was held, hence both (A) and (R) are true but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A).

2012

The Supreme Court observed that noise pollution cannot be tolerated, even if such noise was a direct result of and was connected with religious activities in the case of

  1. (a)A.P. Pollution Control Board v. Prof. M.V. Naidu
  2. (b)Church of God (Full Gospel) in India v. KKR Majestic Colony Welfare Association✓
  3. (c)K.M. Chinappa v. Union of India
  4. (d)Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : In the case of Church of God (Full Gospel) in India v. K.K.R. M. Welfare Association, AIR, 2000 S.C., the Supreme Court held that while exercising the right to religious freedom under Articles 25 and 26, no person has the right to cause noise pollution or disturb the peace of other persons. Playing musical instruments to worship is not essential for any religion to follow.

2012Assertion–Reason

Assertion (A): Nobody can claim a fundamental right to create noise pollution by amplifying the sound of his speech with the help of loudspeaker.

Reason (R): While one has a right to speech, others have a right to listen or decline to listen. Anyone who wishes to live in peace, comfort and quiet within his house has a fundamental right to prevent the noise as pollutantion reaching him.

Code:

  1. (a)(A) is true, but (R) is false
  2. (b)(A) is false, but (R) is true
  3. (c)(A) and (R) are true but (R) is not correct explanation of (A)
  4. (d)(A) and (R) are true and (R) is correct explanation of (A)✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : In the case of In Re Noise Pollution AIR 2005 S.C. 3036, the Supreme Court held that under Article 21, every person has the right to live in a noise pollution free environment, which cannot be infringed by exercising the right granted under Article 19-1(a). No person has the right to claim the right to speech by using loudspeaker and loud amplifier, and one cannot be compelled to listen to any person.

2012

In which no the following cases it was held that there is no reason to compel non-smoken to be helpless victims of air pollution?

  1. (a)Samatntha v. State of A.P.
  2. (b)M.C. Mehta v. Union of India
  3. (c)Murali Deora v. Union of India✓
  4. (d)Sheela Barse v. Union of India
Answer & explanation

Ans. (c) : In the case of Murli S. Deora v. Union of India, AIR 2002 S.C., the Supreme Court directed all states and union territories to ban smoking in public places, including transport facilities such as railways, health and educational institutions, libraries, court buildings, government offices etc. There is no reason to compel non-smokers to be helpless victims of air pollution.

2012

Protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding forests and wildlife is

  1. (a)A fundamental right
  2. (b)One of the Directive Principles of State Policy
  3. (c)One of the Fundamental Duties
  4. (d)Both one of the Directive Principles of State Policy and one of the Fundamental Duties✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : Protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding forests and wildlife is both a Directive Principle of State Policy and a Fundamental Duty. Article 48-A of Part IV expects that the State shall endeavor to protect and improve the environment and safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country. Article 51-A clause (g) of Part IV-A provides that it shall be the duty of every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife, and to have compassion for living creatures.

2012

In which of the following cases, the Supreme Court applied the doctrine of public trust that the State as a trustee of all natural resources is under a legal duty to protect the natural resources. These natural resources are meant for public use and cannot be converted into private ownership?

  1. (a)M.C. Mehta v. Kamalnath and others✓
  2. (b)M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Ganga Water Pollution case)
  3. (c)M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Replacing diesel vehicles by CNG vehicles)
  4. (d)Church of God (Full Gospel) in India v. KKR Majestic Colony Welfare Association
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : In the case of M.C. Mehta v. Kamalnath and others, the Supreme Court applied the doctrine of public trust. The Court held that the State as a trustee of all natural resources has a legal duty to protect the natural resources. These natural resources are meant for public use and cannot be converted into private ownership.

2012

In which of the following cases, the Supreme Court discussed the development of the precautionary principle?

  1. (a)A.P. Pollution Control Board v. M.V.Nayudu✓
  2. (b)Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of U.P.
  3. (c)M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Ganga Water Pollution case)
  4. (d)Olga Tellis (1986) case
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : In the case of A.P. Pollution Control Board v. M.V. Nayudu, the Supreme Court propounded the precautionary principle.

2012Assertion–Reason

Assertion (A): The right to clean drinking water and right to free air to breath are attributes of the right to life.

Reason (R): Because they are the basic elements which sustain life.

Code:

  1. (a)(A) and (R) are true and (R) is correct explanation of (A)✓
  2. (b)(A) and (R) are true but (R) is not correct explanation of (A)
  3. (c)(A) is true, but (R) is false
  4. (d)(A) is false, but (R) is true
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar, AIR 1991 Su. Court - The right to clean drinking water and the right to free air to breathe are attributes of the right to life because they are the basic elements which sustain life. Therefore, both the assertion and the reason are true and the reason is the correct explanation of the assertion.

2012

In which of the following cases, the Supreme Court observed that, 'When there is a state of uncertainty due to the lac of data or material about the extent of damage or pollution likely to be caused, then in order to maintain the ecological balance, the burden of proof that the said balance will be maintained must necessarily be on the industry or the unit which is likely to cause pollution?

  1. (a)M.C. Mehta. Union of India
  2. (b)Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation
  3. (c)Taj Trapezium case
  4. (d)None of the above✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1991) 2 SCC 137 - The Court directed the Delhi administration to strictly enforce the Central Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation AIR 1986 SC 180 - The right to livelihood is a fundamental right under Article 21. In the Taj Trapezium case, the Court ordered the removal of polluting industries reaching the Taj Mahal located in Agra.

2012

In which of the following cases, the Supreme Court directed closing down and demolition of shrimp industries in coastal regulation zone and implement the "precautionary principle" and "the polluter pays principle and held them liable for payment of compensation for reversing the ecology and compensate the individual for loss suffered?

  1. (a)S. Jagannath v. Union of India✓
  2. (b)Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India
  3. (c)M.C. Mehta v. Union of India
  4. (d)Church of God (Full Gospels) in India v. KKR Majestic Colony Welfare Association
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : In the case of S. Jagannath v. Union of India A.I.R. 1997 SC 811, the Supreme Court directed closing down or demolition of shrimp industries in coastal regulation zone and ordered to implement the "precautionary principle" and "polluter pays principle" and directed them to pay compensation for reversing the ecology.

2012

In which of the following cases, the Supreme Court upheld the governmental direction is close down the limestone mining operations and quarrying permanently, holding it the duty of the lessee to protest and safeguard the right of the people to live in a healthy environment with minimal disturbance of ecological balance?

  1. (a)All India Council for Enviro Legal Action v. Union of India
  2. (b)Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of Uttar Pradesh✓
  3. (c)Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India
  4. (d)M.C. Mehta v. Union of India
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : In the case of Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra Dehradun v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1985) 2 S.C.C. 431, the public interest litigation by the Supreme Court ordered the limestone quarrying activity to be permanently closed after inspection by a committee, as it was found to be polluting the environment.

2013

Which of the following Judges of Supreme Court is famously known as the 'Green Judge'?

  1. (a)Justice V.R. Krishna Iyyar
  2. (b)Justice P.N. Bhagwati
  3. (c)Justice Kuldip Singh✓
  4. (d)Justice B.N. Kirpal
Answer & explanation

Ans. (c) : Justice Kuldip Singh, a judge of the Supreme Court of India, is famously known as the "Green Judge".

2013

Which of the following Articles of the Constitution of India have been mostly used by the Supreme Court to protect environment

  1. (a)Article 32
  2. (b)Article 21
  3. (c)Both Article 21 and 32✓
  4. (d)None of the above
Answer & explanation

Ans. (c) : The Supreme Court has used Articles 21 and 32 to protect the environment. Article 21 provides for the protection of life and personal liberty and Article 32 provides power to enforce fundamental rights. The environment is essential for life. M.C. Mehta and Murli S. Deora are leading cases related to this.

2013

What is the period of notice required to be served upon the Central Government for filing a criminal complaint by any person, under the provisions of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986?

  1. (a)Not less than 30 days
  2. (b)Not less than 60 days✓
  3. (c)Not less than 90 days
  4. (d)None of the above
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : Under the Environment Protection Act 1986, it is necessary to give 60 days prior notice to the Central Government before filing a criminal complaint by any person. Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code is related to the principle of notice. According to this Section, before filing any case against the Central or State Government, it is mandatory to give 2 months prior notice. In urgent matters, notice under Section 80 is not necessary.

2013

Which one of the following cases is considered as "High Water-mark case in Forest Protection" decided by the Supreme Court?

  1. (a)Salebhai Mulla Mohammad Ali v. State of Gujrat
  2. (b)T.N. Godavarman Tirumulkpad v. Union of India✓
  3. (c)Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India
  4. (d)Samatha v. State of Andhra Pradesh
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : T.N. Godavarman Tirumulkpad v. Union of India (1995) is considered as the "high water-mark" decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the context of forest protection.

2013

The Parliament enacted the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 for the control of water pollution

  1. (a)On the request from States✓
  2. (b)Of his own
  3. (c)On the direction of United Nations
  4. (d)On the direction of Supreme Court
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : The Parliament enacted the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974 for the control of water pollution on the request of the States.

2013

Under which of the following Article of the Constitution of India, the provisions regarding duty of the State "to protect and improvement of environment and safeguard the forest and wildlife", exist?

  1. (a)Article 51A(g)
  2. (b)Article 47
  3. (c)Article 48-A✓
  4. (d)None of above
Answer & explanation

Ans. (c) : According to Article 48-A of the Indian Constitution, the State shall endeavor to protect and improve the environment and safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country. Article 48-A was added by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment, which came into effect on 3 January 1977. Under Clause (g) of Article 51A, the protection of environment etc. is a fundamental duty of all.

2013

The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 shall have precedence over other laws and therefore, the provisions of the Act shall have effect despite the inconsistency with the provisions of any other enactment. However it is subject to

  1. (a)The Mines Act, 1952
  2. (b)Atomic Energy Act, 1962✓
  3. (c)The Factories Act, 1948
  4. (d)None of the above
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : Section 52 of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981 makes it have overriding effect over other laws, however this Act is subject to the Atomic Energy Act 1962.

2013

Which of the following is popularly known as "Forest Conservation Case"?

  1. (a)Environment Awareness Forum v. State of J&K, (1999) 1 SCC 210
  2. (b)T.N. Godavarman Thirumulk Pad v. Union of India, (1997) 2 SCC 267✓
  3. (c)M.C. Metha v. Union of India, (1992) 1 SCC 358
  4. (d)Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co. Ltd. v. State of Bihar, (2000) 5 SCC 346
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : T.S. Godavarman Tirumulk Pad v. Union of India 1997 S.C. case is known as the 'Forest Conservation Case'.

2013

Taj Trapezium case is between

  1. (a)indian Council for Enoviro- Legal Action v. Union of India, (1996) 3 SCC 212
  2. (b)Ramji Patel v. Nagarik Upbhokta Marg Darshak Manch, (2000) 3 SCC 29
  3. (c)Vineet Kumar Mathur v. Union of India, (1996) 7 SCC 714
  4. (d)M.C. Metha v. Union of India (1997) 2 SCC 353✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : Taj Trapezium case is related to M.C. Mehta v. Union of India 1997 S.C. This case is related to the harmful effects of air pollution on the Taj Mahal of Agra.

2013

The Central or State Board under the Water Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 is required to meet at least

  1. (a)every one month✓
  2. (b)Every two months
  3. (c)Every three months
  4. (d)Every six months
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : Under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974, the Central or State Board is required to meet at least every one month.

2013

The "precautionary principle" and the "polluter pays principle" are part of the Environmental Law of our country.

  1. (a)True✓
  2. (b)False
  3. (c)Partly true and partly false
  4. (d)None
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : The precautionary principle and the polluter pays principle are part of the environmental law of our country. Constitutional provisions related to environmental protection have been made under Article 48-A and Article 51-A(g).

2013

In which case the Supreme Court of India has made above observations?

  1. (a)M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 734
  2. (b)M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath, (1997) 1 SCC 388
  3. (c)M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath, AIR 2000 SC 1997
  4. (d)M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath, 2000 (2) SCALE 654✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : In the case of M.C. Mehta v. Kamalnath (2000), the Supreme Court said that on damaging the environment, Article 21 of the Constitution is violated, then the court can not only order compensation for the restoration of ecology but the victim can also be compensated for the damage.

2013

In which of the following case the constitutionality, legal validity, propriety and fairness of the settlement of the claims of the victims in a mass Tort action relating to Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster has been challenged in Supreme Court of India?

  1. (a)Union Carbide Corp. v. Union of India, AIR 1990, SC 273
  2. (b)M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 1086
  3. (c)Union Corbide Corp. v. Union of India, AIR 1992 SC 248✓
  4. (d)Charanlal Sahu v. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1480
Answer & explanation

Ans. (c) : Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of India 1992 case is famous as the Bhopal Gas Disaster. In this case, the constitutionality, legality, propriety and fairness of the settlement of claims of victims in mass tort action was challenged before the Supreme Court. This incident happened in 1984 in which many people were killed.

2013

Under which Article of the Constitution Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 was enacted?

  1. (a)Article 253✓
  2. (b)Article 258
  3. (c)Article 255
  4. (d)Article 254
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : Under Article 253 of the Indian Constitution, the Environment Protection Act 1986 was enacted to give effect to international agreements. This Act has a total of 26 sections and 4 chapters.

2013

The problem of the pollution of river Ganga by the inaction of the municipalities was brought to light in which of the following case?

  1. (a)Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India, AIR 1996 SC 1446
  2. (b)A.P. Pollution Control Board v. M.V. Nayudu, AIR 1999 SC 812
  3. (c)S. Jagannath v. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 811
  4. (d)M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1988 SC 1115✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : In the case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1988), the problem of pollution of river Ganga due to inaction of municipalities was brought to light before the Supreme Court.

2013

Which one of the following cases relates to Sariska Tiger Park?

  1. (a)Tarun Bharat Sangh v. Union of India, AIR 1992 SC 514✓
  2. (b)Consumer Education and Research Society v. Union of India, AIR 2000 SC 975
  3. (c)Pradeep Krishen v. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 2040
  4. (d)Animal and Environmental Legal Defence Fund case, AIR 1997 SC 1070
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : Tarun Bharat Sangh v. Union of India (1992 S.C.) case is related to Sariska Tiger Park. This park is located in Rajasthan.

2014

One of the following case is popularly known as "Doon Valley case":

  1. (a)Pathumna v. State of Kerala, AIR (1978) 2 SCC
  2. (b)M.C. Metha v. Union of India, AIR (1987) SC
  3. (c)Unni Krishnan v. State of A.P., AIR (1993) 1 SCC
  4. (d)R.L. & E. Kendra v. State of U.P., AIR (1985) SC✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : R.L. and E. Kendra v. State of Uttar Pradesh, A.I.R. (1985) S.C case is famous as the Doon Valley case. The Doon Valley case relates to environment and ecological balance.

2014

The polluter pays principle has been incorporated in

  1. (a)Principle 15 of the Rio Declaratin of Environment and Development
  2. (b)Principle 8 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development
  3. (c)Principle 8 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development
  4. (d)Principle 16 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : The document of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development with the principle of the polluter pays principle was adopted unanimously on 14 June 1992 in the same form without any change as was drafted in March 1992. This Declaration has 27 principles.

2014

Protection and Improvement of environment and safeguarding forests and wild life is:

  1. (a)One of the Directive Principles of state policy
  2. (b)A fundamental right
  3. (c)Fundamental duty
  4. (d)Both directive principles of state policy and fundamental duties✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : Under Article 48-A and Article 51-A (g) of the Indian Constitution, provisions for protection and improvement of environment and protection of forests and wild life have been made, which are respectively Directive Principles of State Policy and Fundamental Duties.

Two important Amendments were brought in the year 1976. One with reference to directive principles of state policy making the state responsible to protect and improve the environment and safeguard the forests and wild life of the country. The other under fundamental duties making every citizen to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, revers and wild life and to have compassion for living creatures.

2014

The relevant amendment is

  1. (a)49th Amendment
  2. (b)45th Amendment
  3. (c)43rd Amendment
  4. (d)42nd Amendment✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : The subject given in the present question has been added by the 42nd Amendment Act 1976, Article 48-A and Article 51-(A)(g). Article 48-A provides that - The State shall endeavor to protect the environment of the country and improve and protect the forests and wild life. On the other hand, Article 51-(A)(g) provides that protect the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life, conserve them and have compassion for living creatures.

2014

Section 19 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 enables a person to file a complaint in a criminal court after giving a notice to the Pollution Control Board. Once a complaint has been made, the board is bound to make available to the complainant all relevant reports to him on demand. The board may also refuse to disclose on public interest.

Similar provisions are also available under

  1. (a)Section 49 of the Water Act, 1974 and Section 43 of the Air Act, 1981✓
  2. (b)Section 43 of the Water Act, 1974 and Section 49 of the Air Act, 1981
  3. (c)Section 42 of the Water Act, 1974 and Section 46 of the Air Act, 1981
  4. (d)Section 41 of the Water Act, 1974 and Section 42 of the Air Act, 1981
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : Section 19 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 enables a person to file a complaint in a criminal court after giving notice to the Pollution Control Board. Once a complaint has been filed, the Pollution Control Board is bound to make available all relevant reports to the complainant on his demand. The Board may also refuse to disclose any information in public interest. Similar provisions are also available in Section 49 of the Water Act 1974 and Section 43 of the Air Act 1981.

2014

The Supreme Court of India ordered conversion from fuel to CNG on July 28, 1998. It also set up a committee to evaluate the cleanliness of various fuels on April 27, 2001. The name of the committee is

  1. (a)Bhurelal Committee✓
  2. (b)Santhanam Committee
  3. (c)Mallimath Committee
  4. (d)Madanlal Committee
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : The Supreme Court of India on 28 July 1998 ordered to use C.N.G. in place of fuel. This Court set up a committee on 27 April 2001. The name of this committee was 'Bhurelal Committee'.

"The public trust doctrine primarily rests on the principle that certain resources like air, sea, water, and the forests have such a great importance to the people as a whole that it would be wholly injustified to make them a subject of private ownership."

2014

The above Doctrine was discussed in detail in one of the following case:

  1. (a)M.C. Metha v. Kamalnath, 1997 1 SCC✓
  2. (b)Rural litigation and Environment Kendra v. Union of India, AIR 1985 SC
  3. (c)Vellare Citizen's Welfare Forum v. Union of India, 1996 5 SCC
  4. (d)M.C. Metha v. Union of India, AIR 1987 SC
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : In the case of M.C. Mehta v. Kamalnath (1997) S.C., the Supreme Court held that "the doctrine of public trust is primarily based on the principle that certain resources like air, sea, water and forests are very important for the people as a whole. It would be highly unjust to put them in private hands."

2014

The main objective of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act is:

  1. (a)To provide for the prevention, control and abatement of air pollution✓
  2. (b)To provide for ensuring standards for emission from automobiles
  3. (c)To put restrictions on the establishment of certain industrial plants
  4. (d)To establish air laboratory for air quality standards
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : The Air Pollution Act 1981 (passed on 29 March 1981) has the following objectives:

(1) Making provision for the prevention, control and abatement of air pollution.

(2) Establishment of Central and State Boards.

(3) Conferring powers on such Boards and determination of their functions.

2014Assertion–Reason

Assertion (A): A company was unlawfully polluting streams and rivers by discharging trade effluents which raised pollution level beyond permissible limits.

Reason (R): The court decided that the company could not be held liable under Water Act, 1974.

Codes:

  1. (a)Both (A) and (R) are true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A)
  2. (b)Both (A) and (R) are true, but (R) is not correct explanation of (A)
  3. (c)(A) is true, but (R) is false✓
  4. (d)(A) is false, but (R) is true
Answer & explanation

Ans. (c) : The following are the objectives of the Water Pollution and Control Act 1974:

(1) Establishment of Central and State Boards for prevention and control of water pollution.

(2) Conferring powers and functions to the Board for prevention and control of water pollution.

(3) Establishment of Central and State Boards for prevention and control of water pollution.

(4) Provision of punishment on violation of the provisions of the Act.

Therefore, the company is polluting the rivers by discharging trade effluents, which is punishable under the Act 1974.

2014Sequence / order

Arrange the following cases in the chronological order on the basis of the year in which they have been decided by the Supreme Court on Public Trust doctrine under Environment law. Use the code given below:

1. M.C. Mehta v. KamalNath

2. M.I. Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. Radhey Shyam Sahu

3. Hindlal Tiwari v. Kamala Devi

4. Intellectual Forum, Thirupati v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Codes:

  1. (a)IV, III, I, II
  2. (b)III, II, IV, I
  3. (c)III, I, IV, II
  4. (d)I, II, III, IV✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : Cases determined by the Supreme Court under the public trust doctrine under environmental law in the following order-

1. M.C. Mehta v. Kamalnath (1996) S.C.

2. M.I. Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. Radheyshyam Sahu (1999) S.C.

3. Hindlal Tiwari v. Kamala Devi (2001) S.C.

4. Intellectual Forum, Tirupati v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2006) S.C.

2014Match the lists

Match items in List-1 with items in List-II using codes given below:

List-I

A. Intergenerational Equity

B. Sustainable Development

C. Precautionary Principle

D. Polluter Pays Principle

List-II

1. Earth Summit, 1992, Principle 15

2. Rio Declaration, 1992, Principle 16

3. Stockholm Declaration 1 & 2

4. Rio Declaration, 1992, Principle 3

Codes:

  1. (a)A-iv/4, B-iii/3, C-i/1, D-i/2
  2. (b)A-i/1, B-iii/3, C-ii/2, D-iv/4
  3. (c)A-ii/2, B-iv/4, C-i/1, D-iii/3
  4. (d)A-iii/3, B-iv/4, C-i/1, D-ii/2✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) :

Intergenerational Equity - Earth Summit, 1992, Principle 15

Sustainable Development - Rio Declaration 1992, Principle 16

Precautionary Principle - Stockholm Declaration, 1972, Principle 1 and 2

Polluter Pays Principle - Rio Declaration, 1992, Principle 3

2014

For which special purpose a conditional permit for hunting any wild animal cannot be granted under the Wild Life (Protection) Act?

  1. (a)Preparation of snake venom for manufacturing of life saving drugs
  2. (b)Collection of specimen for zoos and museums
  3. (c)Scientific research
  4. (d)Research in traditional and established Universities✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : Section 2(16) of the Wild Life Protection Act 1972 defines hunting of wild animals. Under this Act, conditional permission for hunting of wild animals for research in traditional and established universities for special purpose cannot be granted.

2014Match the lists

Match List-I with List-II and select the correct answer using the codes given below:

List-I

A. Power of Central Government to take measures to protect and improve environment

B. Constitution of Central Pollution Control Board

C. Power of Central Government to make rules to regulate Enviornmental Pollution

D. Gaseous or liquid pollutants in the atmosphere injurious to human beings

List-II

1. Section 6 of Environment (Protection) Act

2. Section 3 of Environment (Protection) Act

3. Section 6 of Water(Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act

4. Section 2(a) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution)

Code:

  1. (a)A-1, B-3, C-4, D-2
  2. (b)A-2, B-4, C-1, D-3
  3. (c)A-2, B-3, C-1, D-4✓
  4. (d)A-3, B-4, C-2, D-1
Answer & explanation

Ans. (c) : Matched list:

Power of Central Government to take measures to protect and improve environment - Section 3 of Environment (Protection) Act

Constitution of Central Pollution Control Board - Section 6 of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act

Power of Central Government to make rules to regulate environmental pollution - Section 6 of Environment (Protection) Act

Gaseous or liquid pollutants in the atmosphere injurious to human beings - Section 2(a) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act

2014Match the lists

Match List-I with List-II and select the correct answer using the codes given below:

List-I

A. Rylands v. Fletcher

B. Indian Council for Environment Legal Action v. Union of India

C. Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India

D. M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath

List-II

1. Principle of public trust for ecological protection

2. Precautionary Principle

3. Principle of Polluter pays

4. Principle of strict liability

Code:

  1. (a)A-4, B-3, C-2, D-1✓
  2. (b)A-1, B-2, C-4, D-3
  3. (c)A-2, B-4, C-3, D-1
  4. (d)A-1, B-2, C-3, D-4
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : Matched list:

Rylands v. Fletcher - Principle of strict liability

Indian Council for Environment Legal Action v. Union of India - Principle of polluter pays

Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India - Precautionary principle

M.C. Mehta v. Kamalnath - Principle of public trust for ecological protection

2014Assertion–Reason

Read Assertion (A) and Reason (R) and answer using codes given below:

Assertion (A): Polluter pays principle means polluters should internalise the costs of their pollution, control it at its source, and pay for its effects, including remedial or cleanup costs, rather than forcing other states or future generations to bear such costs.

Reason (R): Villore citizen's welfare forum v. Union of India decided so.

Codes:

  1. (a)(A) is right but (R) is wrong
  2. (b)Both (A) and (R) are right and (R) is the correct reason of (A)✓
  3. (c)Both (A) and (R) are wrong
  4. (d)Both (A) and (R) are right but (R) is not the correct reason of (A)
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : Both (A) and (R) are correct and (R) is the correct explanation of (A).

2014Match the lists

Match List-I with List-II and select the correct answer using the codes given below:

List-I

A. Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra, Dehradun v. State of Uttar Pradesh

B. Mamta v. State of Andhra Pradesh

C. K.V. Shanmugam v. State of Tamil Nadu

D. State of Himachal Pradesh v. Ganesh Wood Products

List-II

1. Grant of a lease of land or its renewal without the approval of the Central Government is void

2. Balancing environmental and ecological integrity against industrial demands on forest resources

3. Renewal of lease on forest land is not a vested right

4. Forest-based industries do not have an absolute or an unrestricted right

Code:

  1. (a)A-2, B-3, C-1, D-4
  2. (b)A-1, B-4, C-2, D-3✓
  3. (c)A-2, B-3, C-4, D-1
  4. (d)A-1, B-2, C-3, D-4
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : Matched list:

Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra Dehradun v. State of Uttar Pradesh - Grant of lease of land or its renewal without the approval of Central Government is void

Mamta v. State of Andhra Pradesh - Forest based industries do not have unrestricted or absolute right to operate their units in areas where forest resources are scarce

K.V. Shanmugam v. State of Tamil Nadu - Balance between environmental and ecological ethics against industrial demands on forest resources

State of Himachal Pradesh v. Ganesh Wood Products - Renewal of lease on forest land is not a vested right

2014Assertion–Reason

Read Assertion (A) and Reason (R) and answer using codes given below:

Assertion (A): In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, no one shall be subjected only for such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others, and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order, and the general welfare in a democratic society.

Reason (R): Because Article 29(2) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states so.

Codes:

  1. (a)Both (A) and (R) are right and (R) is correct reason of (A)
  2. (b)(A) is riight, but (R) is wrong
  3. (c)(A) is wrong, but (R) is right
  4. (d)Both (A) and (R) are wrong✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : Both Assertion (A) and Reason (R) are wrong. Article 29 of the Indian Constitution provides for protection of interests of minorities. Restrictions can be imposed on someone's rights and freedom by law. According to Article 29(2), no citizen shall be denied admission to any educational institution maintained by the State or receiving aid out of State funds on grounds only of religion, race, caste, language.

2014

"Where directive principles have found statutory expression in do's and dont's the court will not sit idle and allow government to become a statutory mockery for protection of environment. The law will relentlessly be enforced and the plea of poor finance will be poor alibi when people in misery cry for justice. The above was observed in Municipal Council of Ratlan v. Vardhichand by:

  1. (a)Justice Chinnappa Reddy
  2. (b)Justice V.R. Krishna Iyyer✓
  3. (c)Justice P.N. Bhagavati
  4. (d)Justice Ranaganath Misra
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : In the case of Municipal Council of Ratlam v. Vardhichand (AIR) 1980 SC 1622, Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer had made the above remarks.

2014

Protection and improvement of Environment and safeguarding forest and wild life is:

  1. (a)A Fundamental Right
  2. (b)One of the Directive Principles of State Policy
  3. (c)One of the Fundamental Duties
  4. (d)Both Directive Principles of State Policy and Fundamental Duty✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : According to Article 48A and Article 51A (g) of the Indian Constitution, protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding of forest and wild life are both Directive Principles of State Policy and Fundamental Duties.

2014

In which of the following cases, the Supreme Court directed closing down and demolition of shrimp Industries in coastal regulation zone and implement the "Precautionary principle" and' the polluter pays principle' and held them liable for payment of compensation for eversing the ecology and compensate the individual for loss suffered?

  1. (a)M.C. Mehta v. Union of India
  2. (b)S. Jajganath v. Union of India✓
  3. (c)Church of God (Full Gosels) in india v. K.K.R. majestic Colony Welfare Association
  4. (d)Vellore' Citizen's Welfare Forum v. Union of India
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : In S. Jagannath v. Union of India (AIR 1997 SC 811), the Supreme Court had directed to close down and demolish the shrimp industries in the coastal regulation zone and apply the "precautionary principle" and "polluter pays principle". Justice Kuldip Singh while pronouncing the judgment said that the beauty and recreational utility of the natural beauty provided to man by the sea coast and the sea should be maintained.

2014Assertion–Reason

Read Assertion (A) and Reason (R) and answer using the code given below:

Assertion (A): The right to clean drinking water and right to pollution free air to breath are attributes of "Right to Life"

Reason (R): Because they are the basic elements, which sustain life.

Codes:

  1. (a)Both (A) and (R) are true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A)✓
  2. (b)Both (A) and (R) are true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A)
  3. (c)(A) is true, but (R) is false
  4. (d)(A) is false, but (R) is true
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : In the case of Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar (1991) s.c., it was held that the right to use pollution free water and air is included in the right to life granted under Article 21. Because it is the basic element of livelihood.

2014

In which of the following cases the Supreme Court applied the doctrine of public trust that the state as trustee of all natural resources is under a legal duty to protect the natural resources. These natural resources are meant for public use and cannot be converted into private ownership?

  1. (a)M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Ganga Water Pollution Case)
  2. (b)M.C. Mehta v. Kamalnath and others✓
  3. (c)M.C. Mehata v. Union of India (Replacing diesel vehicles by CNG Vehicles)
  4. (d)Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v State of U.P.
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : In M.C. Mehta v. Kamalnath and others (1988) S.C., the Supreme Court said that the doctrine of public trust is a legal duty of the state to protect all the natural resources, being the trustee of all the natural resources of the state.

2014

Which one of the following is the main objective of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 as amended upto 2003

  1. (a)To check on poaching and illegal trade in domestic and wild animals
  2. (b)To check on poaching and on illegal trade in ivory✓
  3. (c)To check on poaching and legal trade in dog
  4. (d)To check on hunting and legal trade in elephant
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : The Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 was passed mainly for the protection of wild animals, birds and plants and to make incidental and ancillary provisions related thereto.

2016

The Supreme Court while reiterating the significance of "Intergenerational Equity" observed that "the present generation has no right to deplete all the existing Forest and leave nothing for the next and future generation" in one of the following case:

  1. (a)S. Jaganath v. Union of India
  2. (b)M.C. Mehta v. Union of India
  3. (c)State of Himanchal Pradesh v. Ganesh Wood Products✓
  4. (d)Indian Council for Enviro-legal Action v. Union of India
Answer & explanation

Ans. (c) : In the case of State of Himachal Pradesh v. Ganesh Wood Products (1995), the Supreme Court reiterating the importance of intergenerational equity remarked that the present generation has no right to exhaust all the existing forests and leave nothing for the next and future generations.

In the case of S. Jagannath v. Union of India (1997), the Supreme Court said that the seashore is a gift of nature and ordered to stop crab farming due to their pollution.

In the case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1988), the public interest litigation, the Supreme Court ordered the closure of tanneries situated at Jajmau near Kanpur because the water of Ganga was getting polluted from them.

In the case of Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India (1996), the Court gave importance to sustainable development. The Court said that environment and development should go hand in hand.

2016Match the lists

Match List - I with List - II using codes given below.

List-I

A. Banning plastic carry bag below 40 MW affecting Environment, Animals and Wildlife.

B. The burden of proof will be on industry or the Unit which is likely to cause pollution.

C. Compensate for reversing the ecology and compensate the individual for loss suffered.

D. Dislocation of poor Forest dwellers will infringe their Funmdamental right to life and livelihood.

List-II

1. Vellore Citizen Welfare Forun v. Union of India.

2. Research Foundation for Science v. Union of India.

3. Banwasi Seva Ashram v. State of U.P.

4. Jagnath v. Union of India.

Code:

  1. (a)A-2, B-1, C-4, D-3✓
  2. (b)A-1, B-2, C-3, D-4
  3. (c)A-2, B-4, C-3, D-1
  4. (d)A-4, B-3, C-1, D-2
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) :

Research Foundation for Science v. Union of India 2005 (S.C.) - Banning plastic bags below 40 M.W. affecting environment, animals and wildlife.

Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India 1996 (S.C.) - The burden of proof would be on the industry or unit which is likely to cause pollution.

S. Jagannath v. Union of India 1996 (S.C.) - Compensation for reversing the ecology and compensation to the individual for damage suffered.

Banwasi Seva Ashram v. State of U.P. 1986 (S.C.) - Dislocation of poor forest dwellers violates their fundamental right to life and livelihood.

2016

The relevant Constitutional Amendment which obligates the Municipal bodies to ensure Environmental protection are

  1. (a)42nd and 43rd
  2. (b)65th and 66th
  3. (c)71st and 72nd
  4. (d)73rd and 74th✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : The 42nd Constitutional Amendment made provisions regarding environment in Articles 48-A and 51-A (g).

Article 48-A - The State shall endeavor to protect and improve the environment and safeguard the forests and wild life of the country.

By the 65th Amendment, Article 338 was amended to constitute the National Commission and its powers for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in place of Special Officer.

By the 71st Amendment, more languages were added in the 8th Schedule of the Constitution – Konkani, Manipuri and Nepali – as official languages.

By adding Part-9 by the 73rd Amendment and Part-9A by the 74th Amendment, provisions have been made regarding Panchayats and Municipalities. The duty to protect the environment has also been imposed on them.

2016Match the lists

Match List-I with List-II and select the correct using the codes given below.

List-I

A. Justice Ranganath Misra

B. Justice A.S. Anand

C. Justice M.N. Venkatachalaiah

D. Justice J.S. Verma

List-II

1. 2nd Chairperson of NHRC

2. 3rd Chairperson of NHRC

3. 1st Chairperson of NHRC

4. 4th Chairperson of NHRC

Code:

  1. (a)A-3, B-4, C-1, D-2✓
  2. (b)A-2, B-3, C-4, D-1
  3. (c)A-1, B-2, C-4, D-3
  4. (d)A-2, B-1, C-3, D-4
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) :

Justice Ranganath Misra - 1st Chairperson of N.H.R.C.

Justice M.N. Venkatachalaiah - 2nd Chairperson of N.H.R.C.

Justice J.S. Verma - 3rd Chairperson of N.H.R.C.

Justice A.S. Anand - 4th Chairperson of N.H.R.C.

Justice S. Rajendra Babu - 5th Chairperson of N.H.R.C.

Justice K.G. Balakrishnan - 6th Chairperson of N.H.R.C.

Justice H.L. Dattu - 7th Chairperson of N.H.R.C.

2017Assertion–Reason

Read both Assertion (A) and Reason (R) and give the correct answer by using the codes given below:

Assertion (A): Over 200 central and state statutes which have atleast some concern with environmental protection, either directly or indirectly have unfortunately not resulted in preventing environmental degradation, on the contrary has increased over the years.

Reason (R): Unless the Government policy is backed by adequate budgetary allocation, changes to the statutory regime and a bureaucratic will, the government's intention are apt to remain on paper.

Codes:

  1. (a)Both (A) and (R) are correct and (R) is the correct explanation of (A)✓
  2. (b)Both (A) and (R) are correct, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A)
  3. (c)(A) is correct, but (R) is wrong
  4. (d)(A) is wrong, but (R) is correct
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : It is true that more than two hundred central and state legislations, which have at least some concerns of direct or indirect environmental protection, have not been successful in preventing environmental degradation, rather environmental degradation has increased in the previous years. Therefore, until the government policy is supported by adequate budgetary allocation, changes in the statutory mechanism and the will of the bureaucracy, government intentions are likely to remain on paper.

2017Match the lists

Match List-I and List-II and find correct answer by using codes given below:

List-I

A. Public Liability

B. Sustainable Development

C. Wild life protection

D. Hazardous waste/material

List-II

1. State of Bihar v. Murad Ali Khan

2. M.C. Mehta and M.C. Mehta and Another v. Union of India and others

3. Research Foundation for Science v. Union of India and others

4. Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India

Code:

  1. (a)A-1, B-3, C-4, D-2
  2. (b)A-2, B-4, C-1, D-3✓
  3. (c)A-2, B-3, C-4, D-1
  4. (d)A-4, B-2, C-3, D-1
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) :

Public Liability - M.C. Mehta and others v. Union of India and others 1987 S.C.

Sustainable Development - Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India 2000 S.C.

Wild Life Protection - State of Bihar v. Murad Ali Khan 1988 S.C.

Hazardous Waste - Research Foundation for Science v. Union of India and others 2006 S.C.

2017

Give correct answer by using codes given below:

The Environmental approach has led the Supreme Court to derive adopt and apply a range of principles to guide the development of evironmental jurisprudence. Notable amongst the fundamental norms recognised by the court are

1. Every person enjoys the right to a wholesome environment, which is a part of the right to life guaranteed under Art. 21 of the Constitution

2. Enforcement agencies are under an obligation to strictly enforce environmental laws

3. Government agencies may not plead non-availability of funds, inadequacy of staff or other insufficiencies to justify the non-performance of their obligations under enviornmental laws

4. Stringent action ought to be taken against contumacious defaulters and persons who carry on industrial or development activity for profit without regard to environmental laws

Codes:

  1. (a)only 1 and 2
  2. (b)only 1, 2 and 3
  3. (c)1, 2, 3 and 4✓
  4. (d)only 1
Answer & explanation

Ans. (c) : The Hon'ble Supreme Court has given many principles and guidelines for the protection of environment-

(1) Every person has the right to a healthy environment, which is included in the right to life inherent in Article 21 of the Constitution. (M.C. Mehta v. Union of India 1987)

(2) Implementation of environmental laws is the responsibility of implementing agencies.

(3) Enforcement agencies cannot take any plea in performing their duty.

(4) Strict action should also be taken against stubborn defaulters and those persons who run developmental or industrial activities for profit by ignoring environmental laws.

2017

Which one of the following is correct?

The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act of 1981 was enacted

  1. (a)by the Parliament under Art 252 (1) of the Constitution after securing enabling resolution from the States
  2. (b)by the Parliament invoking the power under Art 253 to make laws implementing decisions taken at International Conferences✓
  3. (c)by the states, as the executive functions under the Air Act are carried out by the State Pollution Control Board
  4. (d)by the Parliament based on the directions given by the Supreme Court
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 was enacted by the Parliament by exercising the power under Article 253 to make laws to implement the decisions taken in international conferences.

2017

The Supreme Court in which one of the following cases observed that, "the issue of pollution should not be resolved at the cost of the poor people's livelihood"?

  1. (a)Indian Council for Enviro Legal Action v. Union of India
  2. (b)Municipal Council, Ratlam v. Vardichand
  3. (c)M.C. Mehta v. Union of India✓
  4. (d)T.N. Godavarman Thimmulpaad v. Union of India
Answer & explanation

Ans. (c) : In the case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1997) SC, the Supreme Court remarked that the issue of pollution should not be settled at the cost of the livelihood of the poor man.

2017

Under the Wild Life Protection Act the boundaries of a National Park shall be made in one of the following way:

  1. (a)By passing a resolution in the Parliament
  2. (b)By passing a resolution in the Legislature of a State✓
  3. (c)By passing a resolution both in the Parliament and State Legislature
  4. (d)By passing a resolution in the Municipal Body and State Legislature
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : Section 35 of the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 contains a provision relating to declaration of National Parks - According to which the boundaries of a National Park shall be made by passing a resolution in the Legislature of the State.

2017Sequence / order

Arrange the following decided cases on the right to health in a chronological order and choose the answer by using the code given below:

1. Paschim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samiti v. State of West Bengal

2. Parmanand Katara v. Union of India

3. Social Jurists v. Government of NCT of Delhi

4. Sahara House v. Union of India

Code:

  1. (a)2, 1, 3, 4✓
  2. (b)4, 1, 2, 3
  3. (c)2, 4, 3, 1
  4. (d)1, 4, 1, 2
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : Correct chronological order of specified cases relating to right to health is as follows-

(1) Parmanand Katara v. Union of India Year 1989

(2) Paschim Banga Khet mazdoor Samiti v. State of West Bengal Year 1996

(3) Social Jurist v. Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Year 2007

(4) Sahara House v. Union of India Year 2014

Which one of the following is incorrect?

(a) Montreal protocol is related to Hazardous Waste?

(b) The Precautionary Principle and Polluter Pays Principle are essential features of the principles of sustainable development

(c) The Stockholm Declaration of 1972 has been described as the Magna Carta of our environment

(d) No state has a right to use or permit the use of its territory so as to cause injury by fumes in the territory of another

Ans. (a) : Montreal Protocol is an international treaty on substances depleting the ozone layer, which has been made to prevent the emission of those substances in a phased manner to protect the ozone layer, which are considered responsible for depleting the ozone layer.

"The State is the trustee of all natural resources which are by nature meant for public use and enjoyment and that Indian legal system includes the Public Trust Doctrine as a part of its jurisprudence".

2018

The Supreme Court of India has observed the above in one of the following case:

  1. (a)T.N. Codavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India✓
  2. (b)Indian Coucil for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India
  3. (c)M.C. Mehtha v. Union of India
  4. (d)Shri Sachidananda Pandey v. State of West Bengal
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : The Supreme Court of India has remarked in the case of T.N. Godavarman Tirumulpad v. Union of India that the State is the trustee of all natural resources which are inherently for public use and enjoyment, and the Indian legal system includes the Public Trust Doctrine as a part of its jurisprudence.

2018Match the lists

Match List-I (name of case) with List-II (principle of natural justice) and give correct answer by using the code below:

List-I

A. No state has a right to use or permit the use of its territory so as to cause injury by fumes in the territory of another

B. The Economic Benefit must substantially exceed its Environmental Cost

C. The present generation has no right to deplete all the existing forest and leave nothing for the next and future generation

D. Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal

List-II

1. Basel Convention

2. Trail Smelter Case

3. Environment Impact Assessment

4. Inter Generational Equity

Code:

  1. (a)A-1, B-3, C-4, D-2
  2. (b)A-3, B-2, C-4, D-1
  3. (c)A-2, B-3, C-4, D-1✓
  4. (d)A-1, B-2, C-3, D-4
Answer & explanation

Ans. (c) : Combination of list I and list II-

1. Basel Convention - International treaty relating to transboundary movement of hazardous waste materials and control over them and disposal of these materials.

2. Trail Smelter Case - No state has the right to use its territory in such a way or to allow its use that it causes damage by smoke in the territory of another. (This dispute was a case of transboundary pollution involving the federal governments of both Canada and the United States of America)

3. Environmental Impact Assessment - Economic benefit should be sufficiently more than its environmental cost.

4. Intergenerational Equity - The present generation has no right to exhaust all the existing forests and leave nothing for the next and future generations.

2018

Which of the following do not come under the powers and functions of the Central Board as provided Under the Air Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981?

  1. (a)Planning and execution of National programme for prevention, control and abatement of Air Pollution
  2. (b)Co-ordinating activities of State Boards and resolving disputes among them
  3. (c)Fixing standards of Quality of Air
  4. (d)Making recommendations to the State government for removal of State Board which is defaulter in discharging its duties under the Act✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : The powers and functions of the Central Board under section 16 are as follows, as per the provisions made under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981-

1. To advise the Central Government on the relevant subject for the improvement in the qualities of air and prevention, control or abatement of air pollution.

2. To plan and execute a national level programme for prevention, control or abatement of air pollution.

3. To coordinate the activities of the State and to resolve disputes between them.

4. To fix standards for the qualities of air.

5. To collect and disseminate information related to air pollution.

Option (d) given in the question is not correct.

2018

In which one of the following case the Supreme Court of India held that right to access to drinking water is fundamental to life and it is the duty of the State under Act 21 to provide cleaning drinking water to its citizens?

  1. (a)Vellore Citizens Welfare forum v. Union of India
  2. (b)A.P. Pollution Control Board v. M.V. Nayadu✓
  3. (c)M.C. Mehtha v. Union of India
  4. (d)Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board v. Shri C. Kenchappa
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : In the case of A.P. Pollution Control Board v. M.V. Nayudu (1999 S.C. 718), the S.C. gave the decision that the right to access to drinking water is fundamental to life and under Article 21 it is the duty of the State to provide clean drinking water to its citizens.

2018

Which one of the following is not the function of the Central (pollution Control) Board under the Water Act, 1974?

  1. (a)To advise the Central government on any matter concerning the prevention and control of water pollution
  2. (b)To co-ordinate the activities of the State Boards and resolve diputes among them
  3. (c)To advise the State Government on any matter concering the prevention, control or abatement of water pollution✓
  4. (d)To provide technical assistance and guidance to the State Boards, carry out and sponsor investigations and research relating to problems of water pollution and prevention, control or abatement of water pollution
Answer & explanation

Ans. (c) : Under the Water Act 1974, the functions of the Central (Pollution Control) Board are as follows-

(1) To advise the Central Government on matters relating to prevention and control of water pollution.

(2) To coordinate the activities of the State Boards.

(3) To provide technical assistance and guidance to the boards and to investigate and research problems of water pollution and prevention, control of water pollution.

Therefore, option (c) is not correct.

Given below are two statements, one labelled as Assertion (A) and the other labelled as Reason (R). Read the statements and choose the correct answer using the code given below:

2018Assertion–Reason

Assertion (A): The Government could not control pollutions, in spite of the Continuous Environmental Monitoring System (CEMS) introduced in 2014.

Reason (R): Environment related data, especially on the performance of polluters, has always been both limited in scope and invisible to the public.

Code:

  1. (a)Both (A) and (R) are true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A)✓
  2. (b)Both (A) and (R) are true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A)
  3. (c)(A) is true, but (R) is false
  4. (d)(A) is false, but (R) is true
Answer & explanation

Ans. (a) : Despite the Continuous Environment Monitoring System (CEMS) started by the government in 2014, the control of pollution could not be stopped and the pollution kept increasing day by day, because the data related to the action of environment pollutants is limited and invisible to the people.

Therefore, both A and R are correct and R is the correct explanation of A.

2018

The code of Criminal procedure which contains some general provisions to cover ordinary situations came to be regarded as an instrument to combat pollution is 1980 and was utilized in one of the following cases.

  1. (a)Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar
  2. (b)Charan Lal Sahu v. Union of India
  3. (c)A.P. State Pollution Control Board v. Prof M.V. Naidu
  4. (d)Municipal Council Rarlam v. Vardichand✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : In the case of Municipal Council Ratlam v. Vardichand, the Supreme Court said that anyone who violates the order issued under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 will be punished under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code. This provision is considered as a means to prevent pollution. (Section 133)

2018

To give constitutional sanction to democracy at the grassroot level through panchayat and Municipalities, 73rd and 74th Amendments were made in 1992. Which one of the following subjects related to Environment is not found in the Twelfth Schedule?

  1. (a)Urban planning including town planning
  2. (b)Regulation of land use and construction of buildings
  3. (c)Animals husbandry, Dairying and Poultry✓
  4. (d)Public health, sanitation, conservancy and solid waste
Answer & explanation

Ans. (c) : The 12th Schedule was added by the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act 1992. This Schedule has 18 entries. The 12th Schedule includes -

- Urban planning including town planning

- Regulation of land use and construction of buildings

- Management of public health, sanitation conservancy and solid waste, etc.

But animal husbandry, dairying and poultry are outside this list.

2019

'Public health, sanitation conservancy and solid waste management' is inserted to the Schedule of the Constitution by which of the following Constitutional Amendments?

  1. (a)42nd Constitutional Amendment
  2. (b)44th Constitutional Amendment
  3. (c)73rd Constitutional Amendment
  4. (d)74th Constitutional Amendment✓
Answer & explanation

Ans. (d) : Through the 74th Constitutional Amendment Act 1994, public health, sanitation conservancy and solid waste management were included in the 12th Schedule of the Constitution.

2019

"Decision making process of those authorities besises being transparent must result in a reasoned conclusion which is reflective of a due application of mind to the diverse concerns arising from a project such as the present." This has been observed regarding Environment Impact Assessment Law in which of the following cases?

  1. (a)Utkarsh Mandal v. Union of India
  2. (b)Deepak Kumar v. State of Haryana
  3. (c)Gram Panchayat Navlakh Umbre v. Union of India✓
  4. (d)Tehri Banch Virodhi Sangarsh Samiti v. State of UP
Answer & explanation

Ans. (c) : In the case of Gram Panchayat Navlakh Umbre v. Union of India, the Supreme Court held that the decision-making process of those authorities besides being transparent must result in a reasoned conclusion which is reflective of a due application of mind to the diverse concerns arising from a project such as the present.

2019

Some of the notification under Environment Protection Act 1986 is listed below. Choose the correct option year wise:

1. Notification on:

  1. (a)Coastal Regulation Zone
  2. (b)Environmental Auditing
  3. (c)Environmental Impact Assessment
  4. (d)Dumping and Disposal of Fly Ash

2. Notification on:

  1. (a)Dumping and Disposal of Fly Ash
  2. (b)Coastal Regulation Zone
  3. (c)Environmental Auditing
  4. (d)Environmental Auditing

3. Notification on:

  1. (a)Coastal Regulation Zone
  2. (b)Dumping and Disposal of Fly Ash
  3. (c)Environmental Auditing
  4. (d)Environmental Impact Assessment

4. Notification on:

  1. (a)Environmental Impact Assessment
  2. (b)Coastal Regulation Zone
  3. (c)Environmental Auditing
  4. (d)Dumping and Disposal of Fly Ash
Answer & explanation

Ans. (1) : List of year-wise notifications under Environment (Protection) Act 1986-

a- Coastal Regulation Zone (1991)

b- Environmental Auditing (1992)

c- Environmental Impact Assessment (1994)

d- Dumping and Disposal of Fly Ash (1999)

2019

A malignant act likely to spread infection or disease dangerous to life and making atmosphere noxious to health are punishable offences for environment protection. But the punishment are meagre to meet objectives. Under which of the following law such meagre punishment is give

  1. (a)Environment Protection Act 1986
  2. (b)Indian Penal Code✓
  3. (c)The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981
  4. (d)The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : Section 270 of the Indian Penal Code provides for meagre punishment for a malignant act likely to spread infection of any disease dangerous to life, under which whoever commits such a malignant act shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 2 years, or with fine, or with both.

2019Match the lists

Match the following

List-I

A. Exemplary damages

B. Evaluation of cleanliness of various fuels

C. Public Trust Doctrine

D. Right of each generation to benefit from the past generation and to preserve such heritage for future

List-II

1. MC Mehta V Kamalnath

2. Sterilite Industries

3. Intergenerational equity

4. Bhurelal Committee

Choose correct option from those given below:

  1. (a)A-1, B-2, C-3, D-4
  2. (b)A-2, B-4, C-1, D-3✓
  3. (c)A-4, B-2, C-1, D-3
  4. (d)A-4, B-3, C-1, D-2
Answer & explanation

Ans. (b) : The correct matching is as follows-

A. Exemplary damages - Sterilite Industries

B. Evaluation of cleanliness of various fuels - Bhurelal Committee

C. Public Trust Doctrine - MC Mehta v Kamalnath

D. Right of each generation to benefit from the past generation and to preserve such heritage for future - Intergenerational equity

2019Match the lists

Match the following cases decided by the Supreme Court with the subject given therein:

List-I

A. Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar

B. Murli S. Deora v. Union of India

C. Lakshmi Kant Pandey v. Union of India

D. Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration

List-II

1. Ban on smoking in public places

2. Protection against inhuman treatment in jail

3. Speedy Trial

4. Child welfare

Choose the correct option from these given below:

  1. (a)A-1, B-2, C-3, D-4
  2. (b)A-1, B-3, C-4, D-2
  3. (c)A-3, B-1, C-4, D-2✓
  4. (d)A-2, B-4, C-3, D-1
Answer & explanation

Ans. (c) : Matching

(1) Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar case is related to Speedy Trial.

(2) Murli S. Deora v. Union of India case is related to ban on smoking in public places.

(3) Lakshmi Kant Pandey v. Union of India case is related to child welfare.

(4) Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration case is related to protection against inhuman treatment in jail.

Right to Education Act seeks to provide free and compulsory education to all children between 6 and 14 years. But a modification in Child labour Act formalises employment of children between 0 and 14 years in the family enterprises. Therefore, which of the following ILO Conventions is violated?

1. Convention 138

2. Convention 182

3. Convention 126

4. Convention 141

Choose the correct option:

(a) 1 and 2

(b) 3 and 4

(c) 1 and 4

(d) 2 and 3

Ans. (a) : According to Article 21A of the Indian Constitution, the State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years. However, by formalising the employment of children aged 0 to 14 years in family enterprises under the Child Labour Act, Convention 138 and Convention 182 of the International Labour Organization are violated.

Dec 2020/June 2021 · Q60

Examine the relevancy of class action suit and choose the correct answer

(A) A class action would measurably assist in securing redress in Environmental cases

(B) Monetary recoveries from the tort feasors in environmental cases can only be obtained through a suit

(C) The writ procedure appears more suited than the class action procedure

(D) The most obvious use of class action is in the mass disasters of the sort that occurred in Bhopal

Choose the most appropriate answer from the options given below

  1. (a)(A), (B), (C) Only✓
  2. (b)(A), (C), (D) Only
  3. (c)(B), (C), (D) Only
  4. (d)(A), (B), (C) Only
Answer & explanation

Answer: (a) (A), (B), (C) Only

Dec 2020/June 2021 · Q70

The Supreme Court of India recognized the signification of Inter-generational equity and held a government department's approval to establish forest based Industry to be invalid in one of the following case

  1. (a)State of Himachal Pradesh V. Ganesh Wood products✓
  2. (b)Vellore citizen's forum V. Union of India
  3. (c)Dr. B.L. Wadehra V Union of India
  4. (d)M.C., Metha V Union of India
Answer & explanation

Answer: (a) State of Himachal Pradesh V. Ganesh Wood products

Dec 2020/June 2021 · Q98

The Government of India's Policy on abatement of pollution adopted certain guiding principles in the year 1992. Which of the following is not covered under the said guiding principles?

  1. (a)Prevention of pollution at source
  2. (b)Adoption of best available technology
  3. (c)Involvement of NGO's for all purposes✓
  4. (d)Public participation in decision making
Answer & explanation

Answer: (c) Involvement of NGO's for all purposes

December 2022 · Q46

Which of the following cases are related to environmental protection?

A. State of Orissa V/s Rabindranath Dalai and others

B. Subhash Kumar V/s State of Bihar and others

C. Almitra h patel and others V/s Union of India and others

D. M.C, Mehta V/s Union of India

E. Kashi Ram and others V/s State of Rajasthan

Choose the correct answer from the options given below

  1. (a)A, B and C only
  2. (b)B, C and E only
  3. (c)C, D and E only
  4. (d)B, C and D only✓
Answer & explanation

Answer: (d) B, C and D only

December 2022 · Q47

A person shall not be a member of State Board constituted under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981

A. Such person is or at any time has been adjudged insolvent

B. has been declared by a competent court to be of unsound mind

C. has been convicted of an offence under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981

D. has become above 65 years of age

E. guilty of an offence involving moral turpitude

Choose the correct answer from the options given below

  1. (a)A, B, C, and D only
  2. (b)B, C, D and E only
  3. (c)A, B, C and E only✓
  4. (d)C, D, E and A only
Answer & explanation

Answer: (c) A, B, C and E only

June 2023 · Q40Assertion–Reason

Given below are two statements: one is labelled as Assertion A and the other is labelled as

Reason R

(Assertion A) (Reason R)

Assertion A : The polluter pays principle says that the absolute liability for the harm to environment extends not only to compensate the victims of pollution but also to the cost of restoring the environment degradation

Reason R : The case M.C Mehta v Kamalnath and other has decided so

In the light of the above statements, choose the most appropriate answer from the options given below

  1. (a)Both A and R are correct and R is the correct explanation of A
  2. (b)Both A and R are correct but R is NOT the correct explanation of A
  3. (c)A is correct but R is not correct A , R✓
  4. (d)A is not correct but R is correct A , R
Answer & explanation

Answer: (c) A is correct but R is not correct A , R

June 2023 · Q58Assertion–Reason

Given below are two statement: one is labelled as Assertion A and the other is labelled as

Reason R. Select the correct answer using the codes given below

(Assertion A) (Reason R)

Assertion A: Rights to pollution free air and clean water are attributes of the right of a dignified life

Reason R: These rights are the basic elements that sustain the life

In the light of the above statements, choose the most appropriate answer from the options given below

  1. (a)Both A and R are correct and R is the correct explanation of A✓
  2. (b)Both A and R are correct but R is NOT the correct explanation of A
  3. (c)A is correct but R is not correct A , R
  4. (d)A is not correct but R is correct A , R
Answer & explanation

Answer: (a) Both A and R are correct and R is the correct explanation of A

June 2023 · Q63

Section 28 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 provides for

  1. (a)Protected Areas
  2. (b)Reserved Forest
  3. (c)Village Forests✓
  4. (d)Power of Forest Settlement Officer
Answer & explanation

Answer: (c) Village Forests

June 2023 · Q73

Which of the following case is popularly known as 'Taj Trapezium' case?

  1. (a)M.C Mehta v. Union of India & ors (1997) 2 SCC 353✓
  2. (b)Vineet Kumar Mathur v. Union of India (1996) 7 SCC 714
  3. (c)Okhla Bird Sanctuary v. Anand Arya (2011) 7 SCC 74
  4. (d)M.C Mehta v. Union of India (AIR 1987 SC 1086)
Answer & explanation

Answer: (a) M.C Mehta v. Union of India & ors (1997) 2 SCC 353

June 2023 · Q76

In which of the following cases the Supreme Court observed that the noise pollution cannot be tolerated even if such noise was direct results of and was connected with religious activities?

  1. (a)K.M. Chinappa v. Union of India
  2. (b)A.P. Pollution Control Board v. Prof. M.V Naidu
  3. (c)Church of God (Full Gospel) in India v. KKR Majestic Colony Welfare Association✓
  4. (d)Common Cause v. Union of India
Answer & explanation

Answer: (c) Church of God (Full Gospel) in India v. KKR Majestic Colony Welfare Association

December 2023 · Q130

Polluter pays principle is also known as

  1. (a)Principle of Good Neighbourliness
  2. (b)Principle of Common Responsibility
  3. (c)Principle of Public Liability
  4. (d)Principle of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)✓
Answer & explanation

Answer: (d) Principle of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)

December 2024 · Q51Match the lists

Match List - I with List - II

List - I (Act)

(A) Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980

(B) Wild life Protection Act, 1972

(C) The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986

(D) NGT Act, 2010

List- II (Provision on Penalties)

(1) Section 15 (II) Section 3 A and 3 B (III) Section 26 (IV) Section 51

Choose the correct answer from the options given below

  1. (a)(A)-(II), (B)-(1), (C)-(IV), (D)-(III)
  2. (b)(A)-(I), (B)-(I), (С)-(III), (D)-(IV)
  3. (c)(A)-(I), (B)-(IV), (C)-(II), (D)-(III)
  4. (d)(A)-(II), (B)-(IV), (C)-(I), (D)-(III)✓
Answer & explanation

Answer: (d) (A)-(II), (B)-(IV), (C)-(I), (D)-(III)

December 2024 · Q65

"The Knowledge derified from authoritative books specified in the First Schedule to the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940" means what as per the definition in the Biological Diversity (Amendment) Act, 2023 ?

  1. (a)Traditional Knowledge
  2. (b)Sacred Knowledge
  3. (c)Codified Knowledge
  4. (d)Codified Traditional Knowledge✓
Answer & explanation

Answer: (d) Codified Traditional Knowledge

December 2024 · Q82

Which of the following can be considered as the first case of its kind in India involving issues relating to environment and ecological balance which brought the issue of conflict between development and conservation into sharp focus with the Supreme Court emphasising the need for reconciling the two in the larger interest of the country?

(A) R. L. and E Kendra, Dehradun v/s State of UP

(B) Goa Foundation v/s Konkan Railway Corporation

(C) T. N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v/s Union of India

(D) Tarun Bharat Sangh V. Union of India

Choose the correct answer from the options given below

  1. (a)(A) Only✓
  2. (b)(B) Only
  3. (c)(C) Only
  4. (d)(D) Only
Answer & explanation

Answer: (a) (A) Only

December 2024 · Q87

What all items are included in the definition of biological resources according to the Biological Diversity Amendment Act, 2023 ?

(A) Plants and Animals

(B) Microorganisms or parts of their genetic material

(C) Human genetic material

(D) Plants, animals, microorganism or part of the derivatives including their value added products

Choose the correct answer from the options given below

  1. (a)(A) and (C) Only
  2. (b)(B) and (C) Only
  3. (c)(A) and (B) Only✓
  4. (d)(B) and (D) Only
Answer & explanation

Answer: (c) (A) and (B) Only

June 2025 · Q12

When did the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change notify the Biological Diversity Rules, 2024?

  1. (a)25th December, 2024
  2. (b)18th January, 2024✓
  3. (c)1st April, 2024
  4. (d)22nd October, 2024
Answer & explanation

Answer: (b) 18th January, 2024

Explanation: The Biological Diversity Rules, 2024 were officially notified by the Ministry on 18th January, 2024, aiming to streamline conservation and equitable sharing of biological resources.

June 2025 · Q65

In which of the following cases did the Supreme Court give a split verdict on 23rd July 2024, involving health, environment, and intergenerational equity?

  1. (a)M.C. Mehta v. Union of India
  2. (b)Animal Welfare Board of India v. Union of India
  3. (c)M.K. Ranjitsingh v. Union of India
  4. (d)Gene Campaign v. Union of India✓
Answer & explanation

Answer: (d) Gene Campaign v. Union of India

Explanation: This case involved commercial sale of Genetically Modified Mustard (GM Mustard) in India.

June 2025 · Q69Match the lists

Match the following judicial decisions with environmental issues

List-I (Cases)

A. State of Gujarat v. Reliance Industries

B. Municipal Corporation Ghaziabad v. CPCB

C. Hanuman Laxman Aroskar v. Union of India

D. Riddhima Pandey v. Union of India

List-II (Issue)

1. Management of sewage treatment

2. Climate change

3. Environmental clearance for infrastructure

4. Green cess

  1. (a)A-3, B-1, C-4, D-2
  2. (b)A-1, B-4, C-3, D-2
  3. (c)A-4, B-1, C-3, D-2✓
  4. (d)A-3, B-2, C-4, D-1
Answer & explanation

Answer: (c) A-4, B-1, C-3, D-2

Explanation: Each case addresses major environmental concerns, including urban waste, climate justice, and ecological clearances.

31 Dec 2025 (Shift 1) · Q93Match the lists

Match the LIST-I with LIST-II LIST-I (Concept in the Biological Diversity Act, 2002) LIST-II (Corresponding Section)

A. National Biodiversity Authority I. Section 32

B. State Biodiversity Fund II. Section 37

C. National Biodiversity Fund III. Section 8

D. Biodiversity Heritage Sites IV. Section 27

Choose the correct answer from the options given below

  1. (a)A-I, B-II, C-III, D-IV
  2. (b)A-I, B-IV, C-III, D-II
  3. (c)A-III, B-I, C-IV, D-II✓
  4. (d)A-IV, B-I, C-III, D-II
Answer & explanation

Answer: (c) A-III, B-I, C-IV, D-II

31 Dec 2025 (Shift 1) · Q133

Which of the following Section in the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 prescribes for Benefit sharing fee and royalties?

  1. (a)Section 6✓
  2. (b)Section 10A
  3. (c)Section 30
  4. (d)Section 16
Answer & explanation

Answer: (a) Section 6

June 2026 · Q57Sequence / order

Arrange the following landmark decision of the Supreme Court in matter relating to different aspects of Environment in their ascending order

A. A.P. Pollution Control Board v. M.V. Nayudu

B. Church of God (Full Gospel) in India v. KKR Majestic Colony Welfare Association

C. Vellore Citizen Welfare Forum v. UOI

D. S. Jagannath v. UOI

E. UP Pollution Control Board v. Modi Distillery

Choose the correct answer from the options given below

  1. (a)E, A, D, C, B
  2. (b)C, D, A, B, E
  3. (c)E, C, D, A, B✓
  4. (d)B, A, C, D, E
Answer & explanation

Answer: (c) E, C, D, A, B

Explanation: To determine the correct ascending order of these landmark Supreme Court decisions on environmental law, we look at their chronological years of judgment:

• E. UP Pollution Control Board v. Modi Distillery: Decided on August 6, 1987 (AIR 1988 SC 1128 / 1987 INSC 199).

• C. Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India: Decided on August 28, 1996 (1996 5 SCC 647).

• D. S. Jagannath v. Union of India (Shrimp Culture Case): Decided on December 11, 1996 (1997 2 SCC 87).

• A. A.P. Pollution Control Board v. M.V. Nayudu: Decided on January 27, 1999 (1999 2 SCC 718).

• B. Church of God (Full Gospel) in India v. KKR Majestic Colony Welfare Association: Decided on August 30, 2000 (2000 7 SCC 282).

June 2026 · Q84

The constitution of Biodiversity Management Committees is provided under which section of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002?

  1. (a)Section 41✓
  2. (b)Section 51
  3. (c)Section 52A
  4. (d)Section 53
Answer & explanation

Answer: (a) Section 41

Explanation: Under Section 41 of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002, every local body (such as Panchayats, Municipalities, or Municipal Corporations) is mandated to constitute a Biodiversity Management Committee (BMC) within its territorial area to promote conservation, sustainable use, and documentation of biological diversity.

June 2026 · Q93Sequence / order

Arrange the following statutory enactment on environment in their ascending order

A. Forest Conservation Act

B. Indian Forest Act

C. Wildlife Protection Act

D. Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act

E. Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act

Choose the correct answer from the options given below

  1. (a)C, D, E, A, B
  2. (b)B, D, C, E, A
  3. (c)C, D, B, A, E
  4. (d)B, C, D, A, E✓
Answer & explanation

Answer: (d) B, C, D, A, E

Explanation: Arranging the given environmental enactments in ascending chronological order based on the year of their enactment:

1. B. Indian Forest Act: Enacted in 1927 (Act No. 16 of 1927)

2. C. Wildlife Protection Act: Enacted in 1972 (Act No. 53 of 1972)

3. D. Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act: Enacted in 1974 (Act No. 6 of 1974)

4. A. Forest Conservation Act: Enacted in 1980 (Act No. 69 of 1980)

5. E. Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act: Enacted in 1981 (Act No. 14 of 1981)

June 2026 · Q99

Which of the following provision of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 empower the State government to designate any area within the State as water pollution control area after consultation or on recommendation of the State Board?

  1. (a)Section 18
  2. (b)Section 19✓
  3. (c)Section 20
  4. (d)Section 21
Answer & explanation

Answer: (b) Section 19

Explanation: Under Section 19 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, the State Government is empowered to declare/designate any area or areas within the State as a "Water Pollution Control Area" after consultation with, or on the recommendation of, the State Pollution Control Board.

June 2026 · Q108

The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 was enacted by the Parliament under which of the following provision?

  1. (a)Article 252(1) of the Constitution
  2. (b)Article 253 of the Constitution✓
  3. (c)Environment Protection Act, 1986
  4. (d)Article 249 of the Constitution
Answer & explanation

Answer: (b) Article 253 of the Constitution

Explanation: The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 was enacted by the Parliament of India under Article 253 of the Constitution (read with Entry 13 of the Union List). Article 253 empowers Parliament to make laws for the whole or any part of the territory of India for implementing any treaty, agreement, or convention, or any decision made at an international conference-specifically to implement the decisions taken at the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment held at Stockholm in June 1972.

June 2026 · Q121

The 'Precautionary Principle and Polluter Pays Principle' are a part of Customary International Law and part of Indian domestic law was laid down by the Supreme Court in which of the following case?

  1. (a)Kinkari Devi v. State (1987)
  2. (b)Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. UOI (1996)
  3. (c)Vellore Citizen Welfare Forum v. UOI (1996)✓
  4. (d)Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of UP (1985)
Answer & explanation

Answer: (c) Vellore Citizen Welfare Forum v. UOI (1996)

Explanation: In Vellore Citizens' Welfare Forum v. Union of India (1996) (popularly known as the Tamil Nadu Tanneries Case), a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India led by Justice Kuldip Singh held that:

1. Sustainable Development, along with its essential features-the Precautionary Principle and the Polluter Pays Principle-has come to be accepted as part of Customary International Law.

2. Rules of Customary International Law that are not contrary to domestic/municipal law shall be deemed to have been incorporated into Indian domestic law.

3. Furthermore, these principles are impliedly derived from the Indian Constitution under Article 21 (Right to Life), Article 47, Article 48A (Directive Principles), and Article 51A(g) (Fundamental Duty to protect the environment).

← Back to all units All topics of Unit VIII