From Preamble To Planet: Weaving Constitutional Morality Into Ecological Action

Through the Lens of Constitutional Morality

Through the lens of constitutional morality, this discussion emphasises the role of the Preamble, fundamental rights, directive principles, fundamental duties, and judicial interpretations in promoting environmental responsibility, further traversing how India’s environmental framework aspires to go beyond legal mandates to reflect the nation’s highest ethical and moral ideals.

Introduction: The Genesis of Environmental Jurisprudence in India

“Ecological preservation is not an act of charity; it is a constitutional duty born from the promise of dignity, equality, and life itself.”

---

---

Environmental protection in India is deeply rooted in ancient philosophy and the highest law of the land, the Constitution, in modern times. In the current scenario, constitutional and environmental laws have a mutual impact in India. The Constitution serves as a beacon in the Preamble, as well as a source of fundamental rights, directive principles, fundamental duties, and jurisprudential interpretation by the courts, encompassing environmental measures and community action, lending substance to the idealism.

This synergy is particularly distinct when constitutional morality is used as an anchor and a compass to verify that ecological governance is beyond the boundaries of legal statements and reflects the utmost ethical ambitions of the nation. The blog delves into the complexities of these intersections, tracing a path between the Preamble and modern historical ecological undertakings through the lens of constitutional morality.

Constitutional Morality: Beyond Legal Text to Living Values

Constitutional morality is the foundational principles and values of the constitution, which are expected to help the state and the citizens move beyond formal legitimacy guided by justice, fairness, and inclusivity. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the founder and father of the Constitution of India, and subsequently the Supreme Court in cases such as Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (Right to Privacy), Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala (Sabrimala Case), Joseph Shine v. Union of India has reiterated that constitutional morality should be the North Star of governance, stressing social morality or social opinion.

Main Ingredients of Constitutional Morality

• Rule of Law
• Justice, Liberty, Equality and Fraternity
• Pluralism and Inclusivity
• Ethical Decision-Making

The Preamble, encompassing dreams of justice – social, economic, and political – liberty, equality, and fraternity are unachievable in an environment ridden with pollution. Although the concept of environment is not specifically mentioned in the original Preamble, it is intrinsically present. Such principles form the basis of constitutional morality, which shapes the ethics of environmental law.

Article 21: Right to Life and Environmental Rights

Extending Horizons: From “Life” to “Right” to a Clean and Healthy Environment

Article 21 of the Constitution provides the rather well-known benchmark: No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. The transformative reading by the Hon’ble Supreme Court since the 1980s has placed the problem of environmental protection at the nexus with the right to life. This has been repeatedly reaffirmed in landmark cases.

• Right to life includes the right to pollution-free water and air to enjoy life.
• The Dehradun Mining Case held that the right to a healthy environment is a prerequisite to the right to life and directed the closure of the harmful limestone quarries.

The landmark case of Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of Uttar Pradesh set a major precedent of environmental protection by right to life, leading to the closure of ecologically harmful mining, balancing the economy with conservation.

In another case, M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak Case) introduced the principle of absolute liability and innovative PIL techniques (which were initiated by Hon’ble Justice P.N. Bhagwati, also known as the father of PIL and Pushpa Kapila Hingroni, the mother of PIL), applying Article 21 for environmental damages (Oleum Gas/Delhi air pollution/Taj Mahal protection).

Judicial activism has thereby widened the minimalist interpretation of life as existence to incorporate health, dignity, and a clean environment into rights guaranteed by Article 21.

Directive Principles and State Obligations: Article 48A

Article 48A, inserted by the 42nd Amendment, 1976, asserts that the State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country. Although it is not justiciable (i.e. not directly enforceable in courts), the Supreme Court views this directive as informing and shaping state policy, often reading it in harmony with Article 21 and adjudging law and executive action.

The State is under the constitutional obligation of safeguarding:

• Afforestation
• Protecting the environment against pollution
• Wildlife protection

Major Acts drawing their roots from Article 48A include:

Fundamental Duties: Article 51A(g) – Ecology as a Civic Duty

Article 51A(g), further incorporated by the 42nd Amendment, 1976, further imposes that it is the responsibility of every citizen to protect and improve the natural environment (including forests, lakes, rivers, and wildlife). Collectively, Articles 21, 48A, and 51A(g) establish a novel constitutional framework where the protection of the environment is not merely a right, but a collective responsibility.

Core Legal Principles in Indian Environmental Law

India has heavily relied on international jurisprudence developments, particularly post in the 1972 Stockholm Declaration, which was attended by then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and declared a healthy environment as a fundamental human right. Article 51(c) and Article 253 empower Parliament with the authority to enact legislation that is in accordance with international agreements.

Sustainable Development Principle (United Nations Brundtland Commission, 1987)

Sustainable development is a balancing principle which suggests that development should not come at the expense of irreversible ecological damage. The Supreme Court has clearly made the doctrine of sustainable development part and parcel of Indian law, considering the requirements of the industry, environment as well as posterity.

Polluter Pays Principle (OECD, Rio Declaration 1992)

The perpetrators of pollution must take responsibility for restoring the environment as well as compensating the victims, under this principle. The first unequivocal articulation was that the polluter has to bear the cost of damage caused to the people, as well as the costs of mitigation.

Key Case: Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India

• Recognised international principles: precautionary, polluter pays, and sustainable development as domestic law.
• The court affirmed the Polluter Pays Principle (PPP).
• Used strict and absolute liability, which is distinct from mere compensation.

Precautionary Principle (Rio Declaration 1992, Principle 15)

This principle warns against the probability of risking environmental harm, requiring action even in the absence of scientifically positive evidence of its effect. Its application defines:

• Effort to foresee, prevent, and mitigate environmental damage.
• Failure to demonstrate scientific certainty cannot be used as an excuse or defence against any taken action.
• Those intending to engage in potentially risky activities – the onus of proof lies upon them to demonstrate that there will be no negative consequences of such activities.

Key Case: M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Taj Trapezium)

• The court ordered relocation of polluting industries causing harm to the beauty of the Taj Mahal.

Public Trust Doctrine

The State is a trustee of common property, such as rivers, forests, and air, not a custodian of resources to be exploited privately by individuals.

Key Case: M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath

• Imported the public trust doctrine, holding the State accountable as a trustee of natural resources.
• Transferring forest land to a privately owned hotel in a river flood plain was held to be a breach of public trust.
• State should preserve resources for present and future generations.
• Doctrine has been applied in mining, parkland, and other natural resource cases.

National Green Tribunal, 2010

Conclusion

This movement, which extends back to the Preamble, reveals the legal ingenuity and moral view of India, from constitutional promise to protection of the ecology. Constitutional morality in India is a transformation of the Constitution into a transformative power, guaranteeing that development should be not just swift, but ethical; not just prosperous, but right; not just ours, but of future generations.

With environmental threats becoming increasingly severe, constitutional law and action are becoming the most powerful methods of survival and prosperity in India. The test is to secure not merely the letter, but the living substance of the Constitution, where every action on earth is an act of justice.

References

• Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, No. 14 of 1981.
• Dhruba Kolay, Environmental Justice and Transformative Constitutionalism in India: A Path to Sustainable Development, V IJIRL, https://ijirl.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/ENVIRONMENTAL-JUSTICE-AND-TRANSFORMATIVE-CONSTITUTIONALISM-IN-INDIA-A-PATH-TO-SUSTAINABLE-DEVELOPMENT.pdf (last visited Aug. 19, 2025).
• Environment Protection Act, 1986, No. 29 of 1986.
• Gitanjali Nain Gill, Precautionary principle, its interpretation and application by the Indian judiciary: ‘When I use a word it means just what I choose it to mean-neither more nor less’ Humpty Dumpty, 21 SAGE JOURNALS, (Dec. 12, 2019), https://doi.org/10.1177/1461452919890283.
• Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala AIR 2018 SC 243.
• Joseph Shine v. Union of India AIR 2018 SUPREME COURT 4898.
• Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India AIR 2017 SC 4161.
• C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath and Others (1997) 1 SCC 388.
• C. Mehta v. Union of India, 1987 SCC (1) 395.
• C. Mehta v. Union of India (1997) 2 SCC 353.
• National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, No. 19 of 2010.
• National Green Tribunal, https://www.greentribunal.gov.in/about-us (last visited Aug. 18, 2025).
• Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India AIR 2018 SC 4321.
• Polluter Pays, OXFORD PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW, (Mar. 2009), https://opil.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e1602
• Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1985 SC 652.
• Siddharth Sharma & Suhas K. Hosamani, An Overview of Environmental Jurisprudence in India, V NLIU LAW REVIEW, https://nliulawreview.nliu.ac.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Volume-V-Issue-II-155-167.pdf (last visited Aug. 19, 2025).
• Sustainability, UNITED NATIONS, https://www.un.org/en/academic-impact/sustainability (last visited Aug. 20, 2025).
• The Constitution of India, 1950 (India).
• The Polluter Pays Principle, ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT, https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/1975/01/the-polluter-pays-principle_g1gh8f8f/9789264044845-en.pdf (last visited Aug. 20, 2025).
• The Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.
• Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. UOI (1996) 5 SCC 647.
• Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, No. 6 of 1974.