Case BriefsHigh Courts

Madhya Pradesh High Court: A 2-Judge Bench comprising of Hemant Gupta, CJ., and Vijay Kumar Shukla, J., addressed four writ petitions having similar issues. These petitions challenged notification issued by the State Government prohibiting the manufacturing, storage, transportation, sale and use of the plastic carry bags in the entire State.

Petitioner sought relief to hold that the amendment to Section 3 of Madhya Pradesh Jaiv Anaashya Apashistha (Niyantran) Adhiniyam, 2004 is beyond the legislative competence of State Government in light of Rule 4 (c) & (d) of the Plastic Wastes Management Rules, 2016.

Petitioner contended that State amendment is repugnant to the Central Rules. According to the central rules, only a certain type of plastic was allowed whereas the State law prohibited the complete use, sale, manufacture of plastic. Whereas respondent contended that in accordance with Article 213 of Constitution of India, State is competent to enact State Act under Entry 6 of List II of Seventh Schedule but as the amendment sought to be made will affect freedom of trade and commerce granted under Article 304 (b), previous sanction of president had been taken.

The High Court observed that State Act is a step ahead of the Central Rules by prohibiting the complete use, sale, or manufacture of plastic whereas Central Rules aim to minimize the use, sale and manufacture of plastic thus State Act is not irreconcilable with the Central Act. Therefore, both the acts can be read harmoniously. High Court further approved the reasoning given by NGT in Goodwill Plastic Industries v. Union Territory of Chandigarh, 2013 SCC OnLine NGT 2000.  Therefore, the Court found no merit and dismissed the petition. [Popular Plastic v. State of M.P., WP No. 8182 of 2017, Order dated 06-09-2018]

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Uttaranchal High Court: A Division Bench comprising of Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. and Rajiv Sharma, ACJ., gave directions as to the use and sale of plastic in the State.

The Court took judicial notice of the news item published in daily edition of ‘Hindustan’ newspaper wherein it was stated as to how polythene was damaging the ecology of the environment and consequently it expressed its concern over the havoc created by plastic and demanded the authorities to contribute towards sweeping away the damages caused by the plastic from the State. It was observed that “Polythene is polluting the fragile environment and ecology of the State of Uttarakhand. It has also now entered into the river system and drainage system. It has reduced the fertility of the land. The stray cattle are also consuming polythene, causing grave harm to their health.”

Accordingly, the respondent was directed to apprise the Court about the implementation of the directions issued by it along with the initiative undertaken by the Chief Minister of Uttarakhand to eradicate the polythene menace. Also, the District Magistrates throughout the State were directed to launch special initiative to check the sale and use of polythene. [Ban on the use of polythene in Uttarakhand, In re, WP(PIL) No. 132 of 2018, order dated 07-09-2018]