Who gains from saving nature
Ledger 1 : 33 — For each dollar financing nature-based solutions in 2023, about $33 financed activities harmful to nature. (UNEP)
Cases / Protected area / relocation · India · date not stated

ELAW and Ecolex list M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath, an Indian environmental case

Short record: the main facts, with sources. A full case file has not been prepared.

Nature's voice · report
No measurement of the harm done to me here is on record.
Did nature suffer? Not measured.
Not on record
  • The record does not name which of my species, waters, soils or forests were harmed.
What the record lacks: 1 none on record · 3 insufficient · 1 not measured · 1 unclear See the gaps

The Indian case M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath is listed by ELAW and Ecolex. The case details are not verified here.

What?
The Indian case M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath is listed by ELAW and Ecolex. ELAW / Ecolex
Where?
India ELAW / Ecolex
When?
Date not verified; the listing gives 1996–97 as reported.
Who?
Gained
None on record
Lost
None on record
Harmed
None on record
Why?
Not stated in the sources reviewed.
How?
Not stated in the sources reviewed.
5 of 6 questions answered from the record · open: who

What happened

The record, in order.

ELAW and Ecolex list the Indian case M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath.

The lease, restoration and public trust details reported rest on secondary summaries and are not verified (see unknown).

    In court and with insurers

    Every proceeding and every insurer decision on record.

    Lawsuits and rulings

    1. Outcome not on record
      M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath
      Indian court (level not verified) · Civil · Public-interest petitioner → Kamal Nath

      Listed by ELAW and Ecolex; outcome not verified here. ELAW / Ecolex

    Insurers

    No insurer decision on record.

    What we don't know

    Undisclosed, unproven, untried: recorded as data.

    Nature

    • Not measured Harm to nature: The record holds no measurement of harm to nature.

    Court

    • Unclear M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath: outcome not on record.

    Record

    • Insufficient Reported but not verified: the Supreme Court of India held in 1996–97 that the public trust doctrine is part of Indian law.
    • Insufficient Reported but not verified: the court cancelled a motel lease in protected forest and on Beas riverbed land, held by Span Motels, a company linked to a former environment minister's family.
    • Insufficient Reported but not verified: the court said the state had clearly breached the public trust and ordered the company to pay restoration costs.
    • None on record Not stated in the sources reviewed: the amount of restoration costs and the current condition of the site.

    Did the harm stop?

    Not stated in the sources reviewed.

    Who paid?

    Not stated in the sources reviewed.

    Sources

    Voices on record: — Company or project— Government and regulators— Courts— Press and investigations✓ Communities and civil society— Researchers

    Communities and civil society

    Similar cases
    Protected area / relocation · International · 2019–2020
    WWF independent review (Pillay panel) and US funding suspension
    Same type: Protected area / relocationSame countryCourt: outcome not on record
    Killings and repression of defenders · Protected area / relocation · India · 2013–2017
    Kaziranga shoot-on-sight killings (India)
    Same type: Protected area / relocationSame countryCourt: outcome not on record
    Protected area / relocation · Carbon credits · Nepal · 2000–2026
    Nepal community forestry
    Same type: Protected area / relocationSame regionCourt: outcome not on record
    Protected area / relocation · Kenya · 2007–2024
    World Bank and development bank accountability mechanisms: Embobut (Sengwer), Tata Mundra, Arun III, Jale, Cambodia
    Same type: Protected area / relocationSame countryHarm to nature not measured
    Urban greening and displacement · Protected area / relocation · Water use · India · 2015–2024
    Chennai water-body restoration evictions and Perumbakkam resettlement
    Same type: Protected area / relocationSame countryHarm to nature not measured
    Carbon credits · Protected area / relocation · Cambodia · 2015–2025
    Cambodia REDD+ indigenous consultation failure
    Same type: Protected area / relocationSame regionCourt: outcome not on record