View
231
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
ANNEXURE I
MONUMENT
A. Supreme Court RulingB. Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) ReportsC. Concept Paper on the Taj Protection MissionD. Final Report of the Advisory Committee on Restoration and
Conservation of the Taj MahalE. Studies on Taj Mahal PlastersF. Studies on Materials of the Taj MahalG. Taj Mahal - Some issues of ConservationH. Repairs to the Taj MahalI. Investigation of cracks developed in the veneering marble slabsJ. Thermal Dilation and Weathering behavior of composite inlay
stone workK. Dust Pollution at the Taj Mahal - A Case StudyL The use of Oxalic Acid for Patination in improving marble
lustreM. National Conference on Environmental Pollution and
Preservation of Historical Monuments- Session II: Pollution Management of Historical Sites- Session VI: Air Pollution and the Taj
TAJ MAHAL CONSERVATION COLLABORATIVE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURSIDICTION
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 13381 OF 1984
M.C. Mehta Versus Union of India & Ors.
(Petitioner) (Respondents)
This Court considered the affidavit filed by the Board (U.P. Pollution Control board) and passed the
following order on May 5, 1993:
"Pursuant to this Court's order of January 8, 1993, and affidavit has been filed by the U.P.'Pollution
Control Board. It has been stated therein that in terms of this Court's order dated January 8, 1993,
notices have been issued by the Board to 511 industries in Agra region. The names and addresses; of
the said industries have been enclosed along with the affidavit. The industries are required to file their
replies to the notices by May 5, 1993 (today) ... We direct the U.P. Pollution Control Board to issue a
public notice by getting the same published in the two local newspapers calling upon all the 511*
industries to install anti pollution mechanism / affluent treatment plants if they have not already done
so. All the Sll industries be called upon to file replies to the notices already issued by the Board
within further time of eight weeks from of the notices in the newspapers. This publication
shall be done within two weeks from today. After the replies from the industries are received and
processed by the Board, the Board may, if it so desires inspect any of the industries in order to find out
the correctness of the replies filed by the industries. The matter be listed on August 10, 1993."
Pursuant to this Court's order (quoted above) the Board filed affidavit dated August 5, 1993 wherein it
is stated that public notice was published in two local newspapers of Agra on May 17, 1993 and two
National Newspapers on May 18, 1993 calling upon the industries to file their replies during the
extended time. The affidavit states that all the listed industries were polluting industries and 507 out of
them, had not even installed any air pollution control device. The 212 industries who did not respond
to the notice and failed to take any step towards installing the pollution control devices were closed by
the order dated August 27, 1993 with immediate effect. The closure order was to operate t i l l the time
necessary pollution control devices were to be set up by the industries concerned.
The Taj, apart from being cultural heritage, is an industry by itself. More than two mil l ion tourists visit
the Taj every year. It is a source of revenue for the country. This Court has monitored this petition for
over three years with the sole object of preserving and protecting the Taj from deterioration and
damage due to the atmospheric and environmental pollution. It cannot be disputed that the use of
coke/coal by the industries emit (sic) pollution in the ambient air. The objective behind this litigation
is to stop the pollution while encouraging development of industry. The old concept that development
and ecology cannot go together is no longer acceptable. Sustainable development is the answer. The
development of industry is essential for the economy of the country, bui at (he &tmc (imc (he
environment and the ceo-systems have to be protected The pollution created as a consequence of
development must commensurate with the carrying capacity of our cco-systcms
Various order (sic) passed by (his Court from time to time (quoted above) clearly indicate (hat (he
relocation of the industries from 'IT/ to be resorted to only if the natural gas which has been brought
at the doorstep of TTZ is not acceptable/available by/to the industries as substitute for coke/coal. The
GAIL has already invited the industries in TTZ to apply for gas connections. Before us Mr. Kapil
Sibal and Mr. Sanjay I'arikh, learned counsel for the industries have clearly stated that all (he
industries would accept gas as an industrial fuel. The industries operating in TTZ which are given gas
connections to run the industries need not relocate. The whole process is to stop air pollution by
banishing coke/coal from TTZ.
This Court in Vellorc Citizens Welfare Forum vs. Union of India & Ors, JT 1996 (7) SC375, has
defined 'the precautionary principle' and the 'polluter pays principle' as under:
" I I . ... We are, however, of the view that 'the Precautionary Principle' and 'the Polluter Pays'
principle are essential features of Sustainable Development. The 'Precautionary Principle' in the
context of the municipal means:
Environmental measures by the State Government and the Statuary authorities must
anticipate, prevent and attack the causes of environmental degradation.
Where there are threats of serious and irreversible damage, lack of scientific certainty
should not be used as a reason fcr postponing measures to prevent environmental
degradation.
(iii) The 'Onus of proof is on the actor or the developer/industrialist to show that his action is
environmentally benign.
12. The 'Polluter Pays' principle has been held to be a sound principle by this Court in Indian
Council for Enviro-Legal Action vs. Union of India JT 1996 (2) 196 The Court observed, 'We are of
the opinion that any principle evolved in this behalf should be simple, practical and suited to the
conditions obtaining in this country' The Court ruled that 'Once the activity carried on is hazardous or
inherently dangerous, the person carrying on such activity is liable to make good the loss caused to
any other person by his activity irrespective of the fact whether he took reasonable care while carrying
on Ins act iv i ty The rule is premised upon the very nature of the activity carried on ' Consequently the
pol lu t ing industries arc 'absolutely liable to compensate for the harm caused by them to villagers in
ihe affected area, to the soil and to the underground water and hence, they are bound to take all
necessary measures to icmove sludge and oilier pollutants lying in the affected area" The 'Pol luter
Pays' principle as interpreted by this court means that the absolute liability for harm to the
environment extends not only to compensate the victims of pollution but also the cost of restoring the
environment degradation. Remediation of the damaged environment is pan of the process of
'Sustainable development' and as such polluter is liable to pay the cost to the individual sufferers as
well as the cost of reversing the damaged ecology.
Based on the reports of various technical; authorities mentioned in this judgment, we have already
reached the finding that the emissions generated by the coke/coal consuming, industries are air-
pollutants and have damaging effect on the Taj and the people living in TTZ. The atmospheric
pollution in TTZ has to be eliminated at any cost. Not even one per cent chance can be taken when -
human life apart - the preservation of a prestigious monument like the Taj is involved. In any case, in
view of the precautionary principles as defined by this Court, the environmental measures must
anticipate, prevent and attack the causes of environmental degradation. The 'onus of proof is on an
industry to show that its operation with the aid of coke/coal is environmentally benign It is, rather,
proved beyond doubt that the emissions generated by the use of coke/coal by the industries in TTZ arc
the main polluters of the ambient air.
Relevant Extract from:
CPCB's Report - Taj Mahal Court Case l" Report
CHAPTER-II
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORING STATION AT THE TAJ
1. This Hon'ble Court's efforts to protect the Taj Mahal in the Taj Trapezium as an international
heritage have been based on the fact that the Taj is one of the three receptor points in the Trapezium
which is environmentally fragile (sensitive). A copy of this Hon'ble Court's order dated March 28,
1998inI.A.38in W.P. (Civil) 13381 of 1984 is annexed as Annexure-IIl
2. One of measures for the protection of Taj against Air Pollution was the setting up of the green belt
in Agra including around the Taj. This had been recommended by NEERI in its July 1993 report
entitled, "Air Pollution Studies To Redefine Taj Trapezium Co-ordinates". The NEERI report had
clearly identified Sulphur Di-oxide and Nitric Oxide as two of the key pollutants endangering the Taj.
The green belt was meant to mitigate vehicular pollution and also to retard the impact of the wind by
filtering out gases from the an as also solid dust and liquid filthy particles. On April 11, 1994 this
I lon'blc Court directed the MoF.F to implement the July, 1993 NEER1 report for protection of the Taj
by planting (he green bell in Agra including around the Taj.
3. Air Pollution being the main threat to the ecologically fragile Taj Mahal the level of Air Pollution
affecting the Taj becomes a critical factor in its protection. Hence, the functioning of the Air
Monitoring Station inside the Taj Mahal becomes crucial. The two stations are run respectively by the
Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and the U.P. Pollution Control Board (UPPCB). The ASI
monitoring station is located in the North-East of the Taj Mahal and the UPPCB station is located in
the South-West of the Taj. The team found at 9:30 A.M. that the ASI station was closed since it had a
lock on its entrance door.
4. Later on in the presence of Mr. Gupta, Assistant Archaeological Chemist the team carried out an
inspection of the Air Quality Monitoring Machines, the chemicals, the stores, the recording and
attendance methods. The team found that none of the Air Quality Monitoring Machines were working.
The Fluorescent SO2 Analyser Model IOOA, API Incorp., the Chemiluminescent NO\r -
Model 200A bought through M/s. SICO, Delhi in July 1998, SO2 Analyser - D.K.K. (Japan) January
1981, SI. No. 20810 lying in the room were not in working order at all. Mr. Gupta slated that for the
first two machines the spare parts were not available and so these were not working since October,
1999. He stated that the third machine SO2 Analyser from Japan was shut since April, 1994. Hence,
the analysing machines of two polluting gases which are crucial for the protection of the Taj, were not
functioning. This means the ASI has no information whatsoever about the quantity and effects of
polluting gases on the Taj
5. The team then carried out an inspection of the Laboratory Stores available at the Monitoring
Station. It found that the essential chemical solvents to do the analyses of polluting gases, even if the
machines mentioned above are functioning, were not available. The probes for measuring the
acid/alkali 'content of the polluting gases were absolutely dry, when the requirement is that these .
should be kept in water nli the time. The Filter Papers fot' collecting the Suspended Particulate Matter
(SPM) in the Air around the Taj through the High Volume Sampler (HVS) were also not available
There is the non-functional clectncal balance available in the station. The filter papers arc taken to the
AS! Chemistry Laboratory located at Red Fort in Agra
6 Hie teatn then went to the roof to inspect the High Volume Sampler and the Kespirable Dust
Sampler Both these machines at the rooftop arc supposed to continuously monitor the gases and the
dust particles that are known to IK- harmful to the Taj However, none of the two machines were
working Mr Gupta told us that the filter papers in the two machines are not replaced according to the
notified standard practice that these should be replaced every eight hours. He stated that the reason for
this was an acute shortage of monitoring staff.
7. Even if, the machines on the rooftop, Uie analysers in the room are functioning and the necessary
materials like filters and solvents are available; still the Monitoring Station can not monitor the gases
and dust that are known to be harmful for the Taj. This is so because there is no electricity available to
the monitoring station, despite the orders of this Hon'blc Court. Further there is no backup system
available to enable the machines and analysers to function. The register keeping a record of the
availability of electricity showed that on April 24, 2000 there was no electricity from 2:50 P.M. to
4:25 P.M., on May 4, 2000 from 4:55 P.M. till May 5, 2000, 4:02 PM. and May 13 from 9:00 A.M. to
1:10 P.M.
8. On January 19, 1998 this Hon'ble Court had passed the following order concerning an independent
electricity line for un-interruptcd supply to the monitoring station: -
"We direct the UP. State Electricity Board to sanction 15 K.V.A. load to the monitoring station and
also to set up an independent feeder line for continuous power supply to the station without requiring
the monitoring station to formally .apply for the sanction of this load. The cost involved in this project
shall be borne equally by the U.P. State Electricity Board and Union of India. For which purpose the
officers of the Board and the Government of India in the Ministry of Environment and the
Archaeological Survey of India will chalk out a programme, so that the entire project is completed
with-in-two months,"
On January 13, 2000 the ASI on behalf of the Union of India informed the Executive Engineer of the
Urban Electricity Distribution Division-lV, Agra that the ASI had deposited in favour of the Executive
Engineer Rs. 6,20,246/- by cheque dated January 11, 2000, pursuant to the order of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court. However, the team found that no such independent feeder line for continuous supply
of electricity have been provided to the ASI Monitoring Station, pursuant to the order of this Hon'ble
Court. A copy of the January 13, 2000 letter along with the receipt issued by the U.P. State Electricity
Board to the ASI for Rs. 6,20,246/- is annexed as Annexure-IV.
9. The team visked the entrance of the other monitoring station being run by the U.P. Pollution
Control Board in the premises of the Taj. The team found the station to be locked and there was no
electricity available for operation of the station.
10. In the November 1996 report presented to this Hon'blc Court pursuant.to its direction on August
30, 1996 the team of Senior CPCB Scientists consisting of Dr. S.K.. Ghosh and Dr. R C. Trivedi had
recommended on page 21 that the pollution data generated by the two monitoring stations should be
displayed to the public on line. On the basis of the order passed by this Hon'blc Court for
implementation of this recommendation by the two Scientists Committee, an electronic display board
have been established at (lie entrance to the Taj in front of the ASI Administrative Office. The team
found that the display board was shut down since a long lime.
1 1 Summary
In the February 18, 1996 Mahajan Committee Report submitted to this Hon'ble Court pursuant to its
order dated February 5, 1996 it had been pointed out that neither the ASI nor the U.P. Pollution
Control Board monitoring station were working and consequently in the absence of any data about the
gases and suspended particles affecting the Taj. Unfortunately, the team must report to this court that
the position concerning these two monitoring stations as given above remains the same, despite the
order of this Hon'ble Court.
This Hon'ble Court has already issued notice to the Chairman of the Mission Management Board and*
the Taj Trapezium Committee on May 2, 2000 for stating what they are doing with the funds available
to them for the protection of the Taj and the implementation of the orders of this Hon'ble Court.
displayed to (l\ public on line. On the basts of the order passed by this Hon'blc Court for
implementation of this recommendation by the two Scientists Committee, an electronic display board
have been established at the entrance to the Taj in front of the ASI Administrative Office. The team
found that the display board was shut down since a long time.
11 . Sum mar)' :
In the February 18, 1996 Mahajan Committee Report submitted to this Hon'ble Court pursuant to its
order dated February 5, 1996 it had been pointed out that neither the ASI nor the U.P. Pollution
Control Board monitoring station were working and consequently in the absence of any data about the
gases and suspended particles affecting the Taj. Unfortunately, the team must report to this court that
the position concerning these two monitoring stations as given above remains the same, despite the
order of this Hon'ble Court.
This Hon'ble Court has already issued notice to the Chairman of the Mission Management Board and«•
the Taj Trapezium Committee on May 2, 2000 for stating what they are doing with the funds available
to them for the protection of the Taj and the implementation of the orders of this Hon'ble Court.
Relevant Extract from:
CPCB's Report - Taj Mahal Court Case 2fld Report
CHAPTER - IV
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORING STATIONS AT THE TAJ
4.1 Air Pollution being the main threat to the ecologically fragile Taj Mahal the level of Air
Pollution affecting the Taj becomes a critical factor in its protection. Hence, the functioning of the Air
Monitoring Station inside the Taj Mahal becomes crucial. There are two ambient air quality-
monitoring stations run respectively by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and the U.P.
Pollution Control Board (UPPCB). The ASI monitoring station is located in the North-East of the Taj
Mahal and the UPPCB station is located in the South-West of the Taj. The stations were inspected by
the tearri. The stations were in operational during inspection. However, the operation is not as per the
requirements of the notified procedure. A copy of the Notification dated April 11, 1994 is annexed as
Annexure IV-1.
4.2 A.S.I. Monitoring Station The team asked for the past data The ASI scientists provided data
from February- to July, 2000. The data is annexed as Annexure IV-2. On review of the data the
following facts emerge:
4.2.1 The sampling method is not as per the standard method prescribed for ambient air quality
monitoring. The National Ambient Air Quality Standards prescribed by the Central Pollution Control
Board's Notification dated April 11, 1994, state that the sampling is to be done for 24 hours (8 hourly)
twice in a Week at uniform intervals. This is not being done.
4.2.2 There is a serious legal lacuna in the protection of the environment in TTZ area in which the
Taj is located. The TTZ area has not been declared by the U.P. Govt as an "air pollution control area"
under Section 19(1) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. A check with the U.P.
Pollution Control Board's, Member Secretary at Lucknow confirmed that the TTZ area has not been
declared an air pollution control area u/s 19(1) of the Act.
4.2.3 The time ot'starting of sampling and duration of sampling is varying m almost all the samples.
Hence the results become uncomparable.
July,2000
(Total 7 days)
1 to 2, 2 to 3, 8 to 9, 9 to 10,15 to 16, 16 to 17, 19 to 20,22 to 26 (total 11 days)
20 to 21, 21 to 22. 22 to 23, 23 to 24, 24 to 25. 25to 26, 26 to 27, 27 to 28, 28 to 29. 29 to 30 ( Total23 days)
3 to 4, 4 to 5, 5 to 6, 6 to 7, 7 to 8, 10 to 1 1, 1 1 to12, 12 to 13,13 to 14, 14 to 15, 17 to 18, 18 to 19.20 to 21, 21 to 22, 26 to 27, 27 to 28, 28 to 29. 29to 30, 30 to 3 1 (total 20 days)
The above table shows the following deficiencies in the sampling procedure of the ASI monitoring
station :
(a) SO: (Sulphur Dioxide) and NO.\s of Nitrogen) in the air around the Taj monument
constitute a serious danger to the monument. Hence sampling of these gases is crucial to assess the
risk to the monument and the consequent steps to be taken by the AS! Conservation Cell, of which this
monitoring station is a part. The table above however shows that the Monitoring Station did not do any
sampling of these gases on 7 out of 29 days in February, 6 out of 31 days in March, 8 out of 30 days in
April, 8 out of 31 days in May, 7 out of 30 days in June and 11 out of 31 days in July Hence on 47 out
of 152 days or for 30.9%, the monitoring lab during Feb.-July, 2000 did no assessment of SOj and
NO\k to the Taj monument.
(b) The scientific procedure notified in the April 11, 1994 notification requires sampling of the air
around the Taj monument for a 24-hour continuous period. However, the table above shows that in
February, March, April, May, June and July this scientific procedure was violated for 22. 25. 22, 23,
23 and 20 days respectively. Hence for 105 days out of 152 days the ASI Monitoring Station could not
assess the risk to the monument in terms of the safe standards for these gases given in the April 11,
1994 notification.
(c) The ASI monitoring station monitored the air quality for SO2. NO\d SPM around the Taj
monument according to the scientific procedure of 24 hours continuous monitoring only on the
following days in the period February-July, 2000.
February
March
April
May
June
given dates
given dates
given dates
given dates
given dates
Total 7 days
Total 1 6 days
Total 9 days
Total 1 6 days
Total 1 6 days
J u l y given dates Total 16 days
Grand Total : 79 days
I leiice for above 51 .9% of the 152 days from March-July, 2000, the AS1 monitoring station observed
the 2<1 hour continuous monitoring procedure
I lowever. the readings of SO2, NO\! SI'M for these days can give no clue about the risk from SO2,
NO\ or SPM to the Taj monument in terms of the standards in the April 11, 1994 notification for tiie
following two major scientific lapses :-
i) The SOj and NO\s have to be measured every four hours and the solvent in the trapping
equipment every four hours. The data does not give these readings. Further, no solvent register is kept
to show the change of solvent every four hours against the total quantity of solvent available at the
Monitoring station and the person who has ensured the changing of the solvent.
ii) The filter paper which measures the SPM (Suspended Particulate Matter) in the air around the Taj
is not changed every eight hours as required by the scientific procedure. There is no register to show
this change against the total number of filter papers available each 24 hour period and the signature of
the person ensuring such change.
Hence even these 24 hour continuous monitoring readings are of no use in.assessing the risk to the
. monument. Accordingly the money, manpower and effort at the ASI monitoring station is simply
being wasted in terms of any actual protection to the Taj monument on the basis of scientific data
collection about air quality around the monument.
4.2.7 The Air Quality Monitoring Machines for automatic monitoring of SOj and NO, (Fluorescent
SO2 Analyser Model 100A, API Incorp., the Chcmiluminescent NOX Analyser - Model 200A bought
through M/s. S1CO, Delhi in July 1998, SO2 Analyser - D.K.K. (Japan) January 1981, SI. No. 20810)
were found not working and can not be put to use due to inherent problems. The inspection team,
suggested to the Superintending Archaeologist A.S.I., Shri D.B Sharma, that these machines could be
disposed of and the money spent on the laboratory Mr. D.B. Sharma promised immediate action while
agreeing with this suggestion In terms of this Hon'blc Courts judgements for creating public
awareness of pollution, it is important to display the ambient air quality data to the public on dajly
basis of the air around the Taj. In the November 1996 report presented to this Hon'ble Court pursuant
to its direction on August 30, 1996 (he team of Senior CI'CB Scientists consisting of Dr. S K Ghosh
and Or R C Trivedi had recommended on page 21 that the pollution data generated by the two
monitoring stations should be displayed to the public on line On the basis of the order passed by this
Hon'ble Court for implementat ion of t ins iccornmendation by the two Scientists Committee, an
electronic display board had been established at the entrance to the Taj in front of the ASl
Administrative Office. The team found that the display board was shut down since a long time Since,
electronic machines are not effective and durable, it was suggested that the air quality data from the
A.S.I, monitoring station be displayed on a blackboard. The data would show the previous day is level
of SOj, NO\d SPM along with the standards for each. The date also would be put on the data
which would be both in English and Hindi. This was discussed with Sh. D. D. Sharma, Superintending
Archaeologist, who agreed to display the data to the public in this form every twenty four hours.
4.2.8 The electricity supply has not improved as the power failure continue to persist despite the
orders of this Hon'ble Court (Please see the May 2000 report). Further there is no backup system
available to enable the machines to function. The register keeping a record of the availability of
electricity showed following:
Table 3 Record of power failure at ambient air quality monitoring station, Taj Mahal, maintained by
AST
Date
20.08.00
21.08.00
21.08.00
21.08.00
22.08.00
22.08.00
24.08.00
24.08.00
25.08.00
25.08.00
26.08.00
I T -Time
ri From
19:50
12:40
12:48t
• -- T • . ._, J _ T _
13:27
1 10:24
14:10• • i " • " •
16:05
i 19.54
06:13
17:22
. 11:34
J T o
j 20:02
! 12:45
i 12:53
14:05
! 10:25
; 14:35
\5
19.55
06:15
17:25
12:15
Duration in minutes
12
05
05
38
01
25
10
01
02
03
41
4.2.9 The team visited the Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Station being maintained by U.P.
Pollution Control Board. Although, the high volume sampler was functioning, the electric meter was
not working The electricity is connected through temporary connections. The electric wires ace
hanging on temporary supports The person attending the station, Mr. Bal Singh is a chronic patient
and has been operated 4 tunes for kidney problem. Thus, tlieie is an urgent need for uplif t ing this
station. The team requested the Regional Officer of U.P.P.C.Board Mr. Sachan to show team (he
records of the readings for SOj, NO\d SPM. However, he could not produce the records There is
no record kept at the Monitoring station. There arc no records about the stock and withdrawal of
solvents, filter paper at the station. The air conditioner at the station is not working since the past ten
years. Hie U.P.P.C.Board does not display the SO2, NO\d SPM data to the public even though the
Taj Station of the U.P.P.C.Board is part of the National Ambient Air Quality Network. The National
Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Programme is aimed at assessing national ambient air quality in all
large cities of the country through State Pollution Control Boards to identify the nature and megnitude
of the air pollution. The programme also helps in assessing the effectiveness of various pollution
control programme being implemented by the State Pollution Control Boards. Until the ambient air
quality at the Taj is monitored scientifically and as per notified method, it is diffcult to assess the
results of various pollution control efforts and compliance of National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
4.2.10 In the Ninth Inspection Report of November 1998 submitted to this Hon'ble Court the
Scientists team of Dr. S.K. Ghosh and Dr. R.C. Trivedi had recommended at P. 28 that the Union
Govt. Must issue a notification under section 3(2) (v) of the Environment Protection Act, 1986 to
declare the Taj Trapezium Area (TTZ) as an ecologically sensitive area. A copy of the relevant page of
the inspection report is annexed as Annexure IV.3.
4.2.11. While no such notification has been issued so far, the U.P. Government has notified the setting
up of the Mission Management Board on May 9, 1997 (as required by the April 7, 1997 D.O. letter
PE(P)2/95, U.P., of the Planning Commission, New Delhi for complying with various orders of the
Hon'ble Court concerning the Taj in WP/3381/1984 and for protection of the Taj. This Board is
headed by the Chief Secretary U. P. on May 17, 1999 the Union Govt. notified the setting up of the Taj
Trapezium Authority under the Commissioner Agra to monitor progress of various schemes for
protection of the Taj. This Authority has been set up by the Union Govt. under section 3(1) and (3) of
the Environment Protection Act, 1986 It has been empowered to issue direclu^is to any person or
authority and to direct closure, prohibition, regulation of any industry, operation or process and also to
direct stoppage of water/electricity A copy of the May 9, 1997 and the May 17, 1999 Office
Memorandum and Not i f icat ion etc annexed as Annexure IV 4
4 2 1 1 However the Hoard and the Authority especially, are toothless in the absence of the
declaration by ( l ie Union Govt under sect ion 3(2) (v) of the Knviromncnt Protection Act of the IT/, as
an ecologically sensitive area Surpr is ing (hat while Notification for setting up the 'IT/, authority has
been issued bv the Union Govt under section 3 (1 ) and 3(3) of the Environment Protection Act no
notification u/s 3(2) of the Act has been issued to declare the TTZ as an ecologically fragile area. The
Union Govt. has been issuing such notifications a sample of which is annexed as Annexure IV.5.
4.2.12 Hence two serious legal lacunae exist as regards the protection of the Taj Monument. Firstly,
there is no notification by the U.P. Govt. u/s 19(1) of the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act
1981 for declaring the TTZ as an air pollution control area. Second, there is no notification by the
Union Environment Ministry ii/s 3(2)(v) of the Environment, Protection Act, 1986 to declare the TTZ
as an ecological fragile area. In the absence of these two notifications the essential steps under these
two Acts to protect the Taj monument and other world heritage monuments in the TTZ area can not be
taken. Directions of this Hon'ble Court on this issue are urgently necessary.
Recommended