Indian Asthama Care Society & Or. v. Rajasthan & Ors.
The Indian Asthama Care Society and other plaintiffs in similar cases sought to restrain the manufacturers of gutkha, tobacco, and pan masala from selling their products in plastic sachets and urged the Court to impose a fine on the manufacturers for the pollution caused by the sachets. The Court, deciding for all the cases, recognized the danger of plastic to the environment and emphasized the right of all people to unpolluted environment and the State's obligation to protect the environment. The Court ordered an examination of the sachets to determine whether they contain plastic and stated that if they do, the manufacturers must pay a fine. Furthermore, the Court restrained the manufacturers from using plastic material in their sachets and ordered them to comply "in letter and spirit" with Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition Advertisements and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act (COPTA).
Indian Asthama Care Society & Or. v. Rajasthan & Ors., CWP No. 1966/2003, High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur (2007).
An individual or organization may sue their own government in order to advance or protect the public interest. For example, an NGO may sue the government claiming the government’s weak tobacco control laws violated their constitutional right to health.
Tobacco products that are used by means other than smoking, such as chewing, sniffing, or placing between the teeth and gum. Examples include chewing tobacco, dipping tobacco, snuf, snus, gutkha or gutka, and dissolvable tobacco products.
Limitations regarding the use of quotes The quotes provided here reflect statements from a specific decision. Accordingly, the International Legal Consortium (ILC) cannot guarantee that an appellate court has not reversed a lower court decision which may influence the applicability or influence of a given quote. All quotes have been selected based on the subjective evaluations undertaken by the ILC meaning that quotes provided here may not accurately or comprehensively represent a given court’s opinion or conclusion, as such quotes may have originally appeared alongside other negative opinions or accompanying facts. Further, some quotes are derived from unofficial English translations, which may alter their original meaning. We emphasize the need to review the original decision and related decisions before authoritatively relying on quotes. Using quotes provided here should not be construed as legal advice and is not intended to be a substitute for legal counsel on any subject matter in any jurisdiction. Please see the full limitations at https://www.tobaccocontrollaws.org/about.
"Finding sachets of Gutkha, Tobacco and Pan Masala lying scattered at public places, the petitioners have approached this Court with
the request to invoke `The Pollutor pays Principle' and impose fine on the manufacturers of Gutkha, Tobacco and Pan Masala. The “pollutor pays principle” implies that the absolute liability to harm the environment extends upon the pollutor not only to compensate the victims of pollution but also the cost of restoring the environmental degradation. The principle provides that where the environment has been damaged/ degraded on account of pollution, the pollutor would be liable to compensate the individual sufferers and to pay the cost of restoring the damaged ecology."
Limitations regarding the use of quotes The quotes provided here reflect statements from a specific decision. Accordingly, the International Legal Consortium (ILC) cannot guarantee that an appellate court has not reversed a lower court decision which may influence the applicability or influence of a given quote. All quotes have been selected based on the subjective evaluations undertaken by the ILC meaning that quotes provided here may not accurately or comprehensively represent a given court’s opinion or conclusion, as such quotes may have originally appeared alongside other negative opinions or accompanying facts. Further, some quotes are derived from unofficial English translations, which may alter their original meaning. We emphasize the need to review the original decision and related decisions before authoritatively relying on quotes. Using quotes provided here should not be construed as legal advice and is not intended to be a substitute for legal counsel on any subject matter in any jurisdiction. Please see the full limitations at https://www.tobaccocontrollaws.org/about.
The Indian Asthama Care Society and other plaintiffs in similar cases sought to restrain the manufacturers of gutkha, tobacco, and pan masala from selling their products in plastic sachets and urged the Court to impose a fine on the manufacturers for the pollution caused by the sachets. The Court, deciding for all the cases, recognized the danger of plastic to the environment and emphasized the right of all people to unpolluted environment and the State's obligation to protect the environment. The Court ordered an examination of the sachets to determine whether they contain plastic and stated that if they do, the manufacturers must pay a fine. Furthermore, the Court restrained the manufacturers from using plastic material in their sachets and ordered them to comply "in letter and spirit" with Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition Advertisements and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act (COPTA).