MC Mehta’s series of cases emphasize the right to a humane and healthy environment. The first MC Mehta case expanded the definition of the right to life, restricting hazardous industrial practices to safeguard this right. Although the second case saw some improvements, the third MC Mehta case introduced a new legal responsibility for industries causing pollution to compensate victims. In the fourth case, the Supreme Court addressed tanning industries polluting the Ganga, ordering them to establish effluent treatment plants within six months or face closure. All four cases were brought before the Supreme Court by public-spirited lawyer MC Mehta under Article 32 of the Constitution, advocating for those affected or likely to be affected by harmful practices.

MC Mehta’s environmental litigation has laid the foundation for the growth of environmental jurisprudence in India and South Asia. His cases established several key principles in Indian environmental law:

The fundamental right to life includes the right to a safe and clean environment.
Courts can grant financial compensation for violations of the right to life.
Polluters are liable for compensating the damage caused by their hazardous activities.
Public resources that are vulnerable, fragile, or of high environmental value must be protected for public use.
The government is responsible for preventing environmental degradation and should adopt preventive measures in the face of scientific uncertainty to avoid severe or irreversible harm.
Green benches should be established in high courts to specifically handle environmental cases.