ANNEXURE I

MONUMENT

A. Supreme Court RulingB. Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) ReportsC. Concept Paper on the Taj Protection MissionD. Final Report of the Advisory Committee on Restoration and

Conservation of the Taj MahalE. Studies on Taj Mahal PlastersF. Studies on Materials of the Taj MahalG. Taj Mahal - Some issues of ConservationH. Repairs to the Taj MahalI. Investigation of cracks developed in the veneering marble slabsJ. Thermal Dilation and Weathering behavior of composite inlay

stone workK. Dust Pollution at the Taj Mahal - A Case StudyL The use of Oxalic Acid for Patination in improving marble

lustreM. National Conference on Environmental Pollution and

Preservation of Historical Monuments- Session II: Pollution Management of Historical Sites- Session VI: Air Pollution and the Taj

TAJ MAHAL CONSERVATION COLLABORATIVE

ANNEXURE I

MONUMENT

SUPREME COURT RULINGCPCB REPORTS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURSIDICTION

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 13381 OF 1984

M.C. Mehta Versus Union of India & Ors.

(Petitioner) (Respondents)

This Court considered the affidavit filed by the Board (U.P. Pollution Control board) and passed the

following order on May 5, 1993:

"Pursuant to this Court's order of January 8, 1993, and affidavit has been filed by the U.P.'Pollution

Control Board. It has been stated therein that in terms of this Court's order dated January 8, 1993,

notices have been issued by the Board to 511 industries in Agra region. The names and addresses; of

the said industries have been enclosed along with the affidavit. The industries are required to file their

replies to the notices by May 5, 1993 (today) ... We direct the U.P. Pollution Control Board to issue a

public notice by getting the same published in the two local newspapers calling upon all the 511*

industries to install anti pollution mechanism / affluent treatment plants if they have not already done

so. All the Sll industries be called upon to file replies to the notices already issued by the Board

within further time of eight weeks from of the notices in the newspapers. This publication

shall be done within two weeks from today. After the replies from the industries are received and

processed by the Board, the Board may, if it so desires inspect any of the industries in order to find out

the correctness of the replies filed by the industries. The matter be listed on August 10, 1993."

Pursuant to this Court's order (quoted above) the Board filed affidavit dated August 5, 1993 wherein it

is stated that public notice was published in two local newspapers of Agra on May 17, 1993 and two

National Newspapers on May 18, 1993 calling upon the industries to file their replies during the

extended time. The affidavit states that all the listed industries were polluting industries and 507 out of

them, had not even installed any air pollution control device. The 212 industries who did not respond

to the notice and failed to take any step towards installing the pollution control devices were closed by

the order dated August 27, 1993 with immediate effect. The closure order was to operate t i l l the time

necessary pollution control devices were to be set up by the industries concerned.

The Taj, apart from being cultural heritage, is an industry by itself. More than two mil l ion tourists visit

the Taj every year. It is a source of revenue for the country. This Court has monitored this petition for

over three years with the sole object of preserving and protecting the Taj from deterioration and

damage due to the atmospheric and environmental pollution. It cannot be disputed that the use of

coke/coal by the industries emit (sic) pollution in the ambient air. The objective behind this litigation

is to stop the pollution while encouraging development of industry. The old concept that development

and ecology cannot go together is no longer acceptable. Sustainable development is the answer. The

development of industry is essential for the economy of the country, bui at (he &tmc (imc (he

environment and the ceo-systems have to be protected The pollution created as a consequence of

development must commensurate with the carrying capacity of our cco-systcms

Various order (sic) passed by (his Court from time to time (quoted above) clearly indicate (hat (he

relocation of the industries from 'IT/ to be resorted to only if the natural gas which has been brought

at the doorstep of TTZ is not acceptable/available by/to the industries as substitute for coke/coal. The

GAIL has already invited the industries in TTZ to apply for gas connections. Before us Mr. Kapil

Sibal and Mr. Sanjay I'arikh, learned counsel for the industries have clearly stated that all (he

industries would accept gas as an industrial fuel. The industries operating in TTZ which are given gas

connections to run the industries need not relocate. The whole process is to stop air pollution by

banishing coke/coal from TTZ.

This Court in Vellorc Citizens Welfare Forum vs. Union of India & Ors, JT 1996 (7) SC375, has

defined 'the precautionary principle' and the 'polluter pays principle' as under:

" I I . ... We are, however, of the view that 'the Precautionary Principle' and 'the Polluter Pays'

principle are essential features of Sustainable Development. The 'Precautionary Principle' in the

context of the municipal means:

Environmental measures by the State Government and the Statuary authorities must

anticipate, prevent and attack the causes of environmental degradation.

Where there are threats of serious and irreversible damage, lack of scientific certainty

should not be used as a reason fcr postponing measures to prevent environmental

degradation.

(iii) The 'Onus of proof is on the actor or the developer/industrialist to show that his action is

environmentally benign.

12. The 'Polluter Pays' principle has been held to be a sound principle by this Court in Indian

Council for Enviro-Legal Action vs. Union of India JT 1996 (2) 196 The Court observed, 'We are of

the opinion that any principle evolved in this behalf should be simple, practical and suited to the

conditions obtaining in this country' The Court ruled that 'Once the activity carried on is hazardous or

inherently dangerous, the person carrying on such activity is liable to make good the loss caused to

any other person by his activity irrespective of the fact whether he took reasonable care while carrying

on Ins act iv i ty The rule is premised upon the very nature of the activity carried on ' Consequently the

pol lu t ing industries arc 'absolutely liable to compensate for the harm caused by them to villagers in

ihe affected area, to the soil and to the underground water and hence, they are bound to take all

necessary measures to icmove sludge and oilier pollutants lying in the affected area" The 'Pol luter

Pays' principle as interpreted by this court means that the absolute liability for harm to the

environment extends not only to compensate the victims of pollution but also the cost of restoring the

environment degradation. Remediation of the damaged environment is pan of the process of

'Sustainable development' and as such polluter is liable to pay the cost to the individual sufferers as

well as the cost of reversing the damaged ecology.

Based on the reports of various technical; authorities mentioned in this judgment, we have already

reached the finding that the emissions generated by the coke/coal consuming, industries are air-

pollutants and have damaging effect on the Taj and the people living in TTZ. The atmospheric

pollution in TTZ has to be eliminated at any cost. Not even one per cent chance can be taken when -

human life apart - the preservation of a prestigious monument like the Taj is involved. In any case, in

view of the precautionary principles as defined by this Court, the environmental measures must

anticipate, prevent and attack the causes of environmental degradation. The 'onus of proof is on an

industry to show that its operation with the aid of coke/coal is environmentally benign It is, rather,

proved beyond doubt that the emissions generated by the use of coke/coal by the industries in TTZ arc

the main polluters of the ambient air.

Relevant Extract from:

CPCB's Report - Taj Mahal Court Case l" Report

CHAPTER-II

AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORING STATION AT THE TAJ

1. This Hon'ble Court's efforts to protect the Taj Mahal in the Taj Trapezium as an international

heritage have been based on the fact that the Taj is one of the three receptor points in the Trapezium

which is environmentally fragile (sensitive). A copy of this Hon'ble Court's order dated March 28,

1998inI.A.38in W.P. (Civil) 13381 of 1984 is annexed as Annexure-IIl

2. One of measures for the protection of Taj against Air Pollution was the setting up of the green belt

in Agra including around the Taj. This had been recommended by NEERI in its July 1993 report

entitled, "Air Pollution Studies To Redefine Taj Trapezium Co-ordinates". The NEERI report had

clearly identified Sulphur Di-oxide and Nitric Oxide as two of the key pollutants endangering the Taj.

The green belt was meant to mitigate vehicular pollution and also to retard the impact of the wind by

filtering out gases from the an as also solid dust and liquid filthy particles. On April 11, 1994 this

I lon'blc Court directed the MoF.F to implement the July, 1993 NEER1 report for protection of the Taj

by planting (he green bell in Agra including around the Taj.

3. Air Pollution being the main threat to the ecologically fragile Taj Mahal the level of Air Pollution

affecting the Taj becomes a critical factor in its protection. Hence, the functioning of the Air

Monitoring Station inside the Taj Mahal becomes crucial. The two stations are run respectively by the

Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and the U.P. Pollution Control Board (UPPCB). The ASI

monitoring station is located in the North-East of the Taj Mahal and the UPPCB station is located in

the South-West of the Taj. The team found at 9:30 A.M. that the ASI station was closed since it had a

lock on its entrance door.

4. Later on in the presence of Mr. Gupta, Assistant Archaeological Chemist the team carried out an

inspection of the Air Quality Monitoring Machines, the chemicals, the stores, the recording and

attendance methods. The team found that none of the Air Quality Monitoring Machines were working.

The Fluorescent SO2 Analyser Model IOOA, API Incorp., the Chemiluminescent NO\r -

Model 200A bought through M/s. SICO, Delhi in July 1998, SO2 Analyser - D.K.K. (Japan) January

1981, SI. No. 20810 lying in the room were not in working order at all. Mr. Gupta slated that for the

first two machines the spare parts were not available and so these were not working since October,

1999. He stated that the third machine SO2 Analyser from Japan was shut since April, 1994. Hence,

the analysing machines of two polluting gases which are crucial for the protection of the Taj, were not

functioning. This means the ASI has no information whatsoever about the quantity and effects of

polluting gases on the Taj

5. The team then carried out an inspection of the Laboratory Stores available at the Monitoring

Station. It found that the essential chemical solvents to do the analyses of polluting gases, even if the

machines mentioned above are functioning, were not available. The probes for measuring the

acid/alkali 'content of the polluting gases were absolutely dry, when the requirement is that these .

should be kept in water nli the time. The Filter Papers fot' collecting the Suspended Particulate Matter

(SPM) in the Air around the Taj through the High Volume Sampler (HVS) were also not available

There is the non-functional clectncal balance available in the station. The filter papers arc taken to the

AS! Chemistry Laboratory located at Red Fort in Agra

6 Hie teatn then went to the roof to inspect the High Volume Sampler and the Kespirable Dust

Sampler Both these machines at the rooftop arc supposed to continuously monitor the gases and the

dust particles that are known to IK- harmful to the Taj However, none of the two machines were

working Mr Gupta told us that the filter papers in the two machines are not replaced according to the

notified standard practice that these should be replaced every eight hours. He stated that the reason for

this was an acute shortage of monitoring staff.

7. Even if, the machines on the rooftop, Uie analysers in the room are functioning and the necessary

materials like filters and solvents are available; still the Monitoring Station can not monitor the gases

and dust that are known to be harmful for the Taj. This is so because there is no electricity available to

the monitoring station, despite the orders of this Hon'blc Court. Further there is no backup system

available to enable the machines and analysers to function. The register keeping a record of the

availability of electricity showed that on April 24, 2000 there was no electricity from 2:50 P.M. to

4:25 P.M., on May 4, 2000 from 4:55 P.M. till May 5, 2000, 4:02 PM. and May 13 from 9:00 A.M. to

1:10 P.M.

8. On January 19, 1998 this Hon'ble Court had passed the following order concerning an independent

electricity line for un-interruptcd supply to the monitoring station: -

"We direct the UP. State Electricity Board to sanction 15 K.V.A. load to the monitoring station and

also to set up an independent feeder line for continuous power supply to the station without requiring

the monitoring station to formally .apply for the sanction of this load. The cost involved in this project

shall be borne equally by the U.P. State Electricity Board and Union of India. For which purpose the

officers of the Board and the Government of India in the Ministry of Environment and the

Archaeological Survey of India will chalk out a programme, so that the entire project is completed

with-in-two months,"

On January 13, 2000 the ASI on behalf of the Union of India informed the Executive Engineer of the

Urban Electricity Distribution Division-lV, Agra that the ASI had deposited in favour of the Executive

Engineer Rs. 6,20,246/- by cheque dated January 11, 2000, pursuant to the order of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court. However, the team found that no such independent feeder line for continuous supply

of electricity have been provided to the ASI Monitoring Station, pursuant to the order of this Hon'ble

Court. A copy of the January 13, 2000 letter along with the receipt issued by the U.P. State Electricity

Board to the ASI for Rs. 6,20,246/- is annexed as Annexure-IV.

9. The team visked the entrance of the other monitoring station being run by the U.P. Pollution

Control Board in the premises of the Taj. The team found the station to be locked and there was no

electricity available for operation of the station.

10. In the November 1996 report presented to this Hon'blc Court pursuant.to its direction on August

30, 1996 the team of Senior CPCB Scientists consisting of Dr. S.K.. Ghosh and Dr. R C. Trivedi had

recommended on page 21 that the pollution data generated by the two monitoring stations should be

displayed to the public on line. On the basis of the order passed by this Hon'blc Court for

implementation of this recommendation by the two Scientists Committee, an electronic display board

have been established at (lie entrance to the Taj in front of the ASI Administrative Office. The team

found that the display board was shut down since a long lime.

1 1 Summary

In the February 18, 1996 Mahajan Committee Report submitted to this Hon'ble Court pursuant to its

order dated February 5, 1996 it had been pointed out that neither the ASI nor the U.P. Pollution

Control Board monitoring station were working and consequently in the absence of any data about the

gases and suspended particles affecting the Taj. Unfortunately, the team must report to this court that

the position concerning these two monitoring stations as given above remains the same, despite the

order of this Hon'ble Court.

This Hon'ble Court has already issued notice to the Chairman of the Mission Management Board and*

the Taj Trapezium Committee on May 2, 2000 for stating what they are doing with the funds available

to them for the protection of the Taj and the implementation of the orders of this Hon'ble Court.

displayed to (l\ public on line. On the basts of the order passed by this Hon'blc Court for

implementation of this recommendation by the two Scientists Committee, an electronic display board

have been established at the entrance to the Taj in front of the ASI Administrative Office. The team

found that the display board was shut down since a long time.

11 . Sum mar)' :

In the February 18, 1996 Mahajan Committee Report submitted to this Hon'ble Court pursuant to its

order dated February 5, 1996 it had been pointed out that neither the ASI nor the U.P. Pollution

Control Board monitoring station were working and consequently in the absence of any data about the

gases and suspended particles affecting the Taj. Unfortunately, the team must report to this court that

the position concerning these two monitoring stations as given above remains the same, despite the

order of this Hon'ble Court.

This Hon'ble Court has already issued notice to the Chairman of the Mission Management Board and«•

the Taj Trapezium Committee on May 2, 2000 for stating what they are doing with the funds available

to them for the protection of the Taj and the implementation of the orders of this Hon'ble Court.

Relevant Extract from:

CPCB's Report - Taj Mahal Court Case 2fld Report

CHAPTER - IV

AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORING STATIONS AT THE TAJ

4.1 Air Pollution being the main threat to the ecologically fragile Taj Mahal the level of Air

Pollution affecting the Taj becomes a critical factor in its protection. Hence, the functioning of the Air

Monitoring Station inside the Taj Mahal becomes crucial. There are two ambient air quality-

monitoring stations run respectively by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and the U.P.

Pollution Control Board (UPPCB). The ASI monitoring station is located in the North-East of the Taj

Mahal and the UPPCB station is located in the South-West of the Taj. The stations were inspected by

the tearri. The stations were in operational during inspection. However, the operation is not as per the

requirements of the notified procedure. A copy of the Notification dated April 11, 1994 is annexed as

Annexure IV-1.

4.2 A.S.I. Monitoring Station The team asked for the past data The ASI scientists provided data

from February- to July, 2000. The data is annexed as Annexure IV-2. On review of the data the

following facts emerge:

4.2.1 The sampling method is not as per the standard method prescribed for ambient air quality

monitoring. The National Ambient Air Quality Standards prescribed by the Central Pollution Control

Board's Notification dated April 11, 1994, state that the sampling is to be done for 24 hours (8 hourly)

twice in a Week at uniform intervals. This is not being done.

4.2.2 There is a serious legal lacuna in the protection of the environment in TTZ area in which the

Taj is located. The TTZ area has not been declared by the U.P. Govt as an "air pollution control area"

under Section 19(1) of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. A check with the U.P.

Pollution Control Board's, Member Secretary at Lucknow confirmed that the TTZ area has not been

declared an air pollution control area u/s 19(1) of the Act.

4.2.3 The time ot'starting of sampling and duration of sampling is varying m almost all the samples.

Hence the results become uncomparable.

July,2000

(Total 7 days)

1 to 2, 2 to 3, 8 to 9, 9 to 10,15 to 16, 16 to 17, 19 to 20,22 to 26 (total 11 days)

20 to 21, 21 to 22. 22 to 23, 23 to 24, 24 to 25. 25to 26, 26 to 27, 27 to 28, 28 to 29. 29 to 30 ( Total23 days)

3 to 4, 4 to 5, 5 to 6, 6 to 7, 7 to 8, 10 to 1 1, 1 1 to12, 12 to 13,13 to 14, 14 to 15, 17 to 18, 18 to 19.20 to 21, 21 to 22, 26 to 27, 27 to 28, 28 to 29. 29to 30, 30 to 3 1 (total 20 days)

The above table shows the following deficiencies in the sampling procedure of the ASI monitoring

station :

(a) SO: (Sulphur Dioxide) and NO.\s of Nitrogen) in the air around the Taj monument

constitute a serious danger to the monument. Hence sampling of these gases is crucial to assess the

risk to the monument and the consequent steps to be taken by the AS! Conservation Cell, of which this

monitoring station is a part. The table above however shows that the Monitoring Station did not do any

sampling of these gases on 7 out of 29 days in February, 6 out of 31 days in March, 8 out of 30 days in

April, 8 out of 31 days in May, 7 out of 30 days in June and 11 out of 31 days in July Hence on 47 out

of 152 days or for 30.9%, the monitoring lab during Feb.-July, 2000 did no assessment of SOj and

NO\k to the Taj monument.

(b) The scientific procedure notified in the April 11, 1994 notification requires sampling of the air

around the Taj monument for a 24-hour continuous period. However, the table above shows that in

February, March, April, May, June and July this scientific procedure was violated for 22. 25. 22, 23,

23 and 20 days respectively. Hence for 105 days out of 152 days the ASI Monitoring Station could not

assess the risk to the monument in terms of the safe standards for these gases given in the April 11,

1994 notification.

(c) The ASI monitoring station monitored the air quality for SO2. NO\d SPM around the Taj

monument according to the scientific procedure of 24 hours continuous monitoring only on the

following days in the period February-July, 2000.

February

March

April

May

June

given dates

given dates

given dates

given dates

given dates

Total 7 days

Total 1 6 days

Total 9 days

Total 1 6 days

Total 1 6 days

J u l y given dates Total 16 days

Grand Total : 79 days

I leiice for above 51 .9% of the 152 days from March-July, 2000, the AS1 monitoring station observed

the 2<1 hour continuous monitoring procedure

I lowever. the readings of SO2, NO\! SI'M for these days can give no clue about the risk from SO2,

NO\ or SPM to the Taj monument in terms of the standards in the April 11, 1994 notification for tiie

following two major scientific lapses :-

i) The SOj and NO\s have to be measured every four hours and the solvent in the trapping

equipment every four hours. The data does not give these readings. Further, no solvent register is kept

to show the change of solvent every four hours against the total quantity of solvent available at the

Monitoring station and the person who has ensured the changing of the solvent.

ii) The filter paper which measures the SPM (Suspended Particulate Matter) in the air around the Taj

is not changed every eight hours as required by the scientific procedure. There is no register to show

this change against the total number of filter papers available each 24 hour period and the signature of

the person ensuring such change.

Hence even these 24 hour continuous monitoring readings are of no use in.assessing the risk to the

. monument. Accordingly the money, manpower and effort at the ASI monitoring station is simply

being wasted in terms of any actual protection to the Taj monument on the basis of scientific data

collection about air quality around the monument.

4.2.7 The Air Quality Monitoring Machines for automatic monitoring of SOj and NO, (Fluorescent

SO2 Analyser Model 100A, API Incorp., the Chcmiluminescent NOX Analyser - Model 200A bought

through M/s. S1CO, Delhi in July 1998, SO2 Analyser - D.K.K. (Japan) January 1981, SI. No. 20810)

were found not working and can not be put to use due to inherent problems. The inspection team,

suggested to the Superintending Archaeologist A.S.I., Shri D.B Sharma, that these machines could be

disposed of and the money spent on the laboratory Mr. D.B. Sharma promised immediate action while

agreeing with this suggestion In terms of this Hon'blc Courts judgements for creating public

awareness of pollution, it is important to display the ambient air quality data to the public on dajly

basis of the air around the Taj. In the November 1996 report presented to this Hon'ble Court pursuant

to its direction on August 30, 1996 (he team of Senior CI'CB Scientists consisting of Dr. S K Ghosh

and Or R C Trivedi had recommended on page 21 that the pollution data generated by the two

monitoring stations should be displayed to the public on line On the basis of the order passed by this

Hon'ble Court for implementat ion of t ins iccornmendation by the two Scientists Committee, an

electronic display board had been established at the entrance to the Taj in front of the ASl

Administrative Office. The team found that the display board was shut down since a long time Since,

electronic machines are not effective and durable, it was suggested that the air quality data from the

A.S.I, monitoring station be displayed on a blackboard. The data would show the previous day is level

of SOj, NO\d SPM along with the standards for each. The date also would be put on the data

which would be both in English and Hindi. This was discussed with Sh. D. D. Sharma, Superintending

Archaeologist, who agreed to display the data to the public in this form every twenty four hours.

4.2.8 The electricity supply has not improved as the power failure continue to persist despite the

orders of this Hon'ble Court (Please see the May 2000 report). Further there is no backup system

available to enable the machines to function. The register keeping a record of the availability of

electricity showed following:

Table 3 Record of power failure at ambient air quality monitoring station, Taj Mahal, maintained by

AST

Date

20.08.00

21.08.00

21.08.00

21.08.00

22.08.00

22.08.00

24.08.00

24.08.00

25.08.00

25.08.00

26.08.00

I T -Time

ri From

19:50

12:40

12:48t

• -- T • . ._, J _ T _

13:27

1 10:24

14:10• • i " • " •

16:05

i 19.54

06:13

17:22

. 11:34

J T o

j 20:02

! 12:45

i 12:53

14:05

! 10:25

; 14:35

\5

19.55

06:15

17:25

12:15

Duration in minutes

12

05

05

38

01

25

10

01

02

03

41

4.2.9 The team visited the Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Station being maintained by U.P.

Pollution Control Board. Although, the high volume sampler was functioning, the electric meter was

not working The electricity is connected through temporary connections. The electric wires ace

hanging on temporary supports The person attending the station, Mr. Bal Singh is a chronic patient

and has been operated 4 tunes for kidney problem. Thus, tlieie is an urgent need for uplif t ing this

station. The team requested the Regional Officer of U.P.P.C.Board Mr. Sachan to show team (he

records of the readings for SOj, NO\d SPM. However, he could not produce the records There is

no record kept at the Monitoring station. There arc no records about the stock and withdrawal of

solvents, filter paper at the station. The air conditioner at the station is not working since the past ten

years. Hie U.P.P.C.Board does not display the SO2, NO\d SPM data to the public even though the

Taj Station of the U.P.P.C.Board is part of the National Ambient Air Quality Network. The National

Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Programme is aimed at assessing national ambient air quality in all

large cities of the country through State Pollution Control Boards to identify the nature and megnitude

of the air pollution. The programme also helps in assessing the effectiveness of various pollution

control programme being implemented by the State Pollution Control Boards. Until the ambient air

quality at the Taj is monitored scientifically and as per notified method, it is diffcult to assess the

results of various pollution control efforts and compliance of National Ambient Air Quality Standards.

4.2.10 In the Ninth Inspection Report of November 1998 submitted to this Hon'ble Court the

Scientists team of Dr. S.K. Ghosh and Dr. R.C. Trivedi had recommended at P. 28 that the Union

Govt. Must issue a notification under section 3(2) (v) of the Environment Protection Act, 1986 to

declare the Taj Trapezium Area (TTZ) as an ecologically sensitive area. A copy of the relevant page of

the inspection report is annexed as Annexure IV.3.

4.2.11. While no such notification has been issued so far, the U.P. Government has notified the setting

up of the Mission Management Board on May 9, 1997 (as required by the April 7, 1997 D.O. letter

PE(P)2/95, U.P., of the Planning Commission, New Delhi for complying with various orders of the

Hon'ble Court concerning the Taj in WP/3381/1984 and for protection of the Taj. This Board is

headed by the Chief Secretary U. P. on May 17, 1999 the Union Govt. notified the setting up of the Taj

Trapezium Authority under the Commissioner Agra to monitor progress of various schemes for

protection of the Taj. This Authority has been set up by the Union Govt. under section 3(1) and (3) of

the Environment Protection Act, 1986 It has been empowered to issue direclu^is to any person or

authority and to direct closure, prohibition, regulation of any industry, operation or process and also to

direct stoppage of water/electricity A copy of the May 9, 1997 and the May 17, 1999 Office

Memorandum and Not i f icat ion etc annexed as Annexure IV 4

4 2 1 1 However the Hoard and the Authority especially, are toothless in the absence of the

declaration by ( l ie Union Govt under sect ion 3(2) (v) of the Knviromncnt Protection Act of the IT/, as

an ecologically sensitive area Surpr is ing (hat while Notification for setting up the 'IT/, authority has

been issued bv the Union Govt under section 3 (1 ) and 3(3) of the Environment Protection Act no

notification u/s 3(2) of the Act has been issued to declare the TTZ as an ecologically fragile area. The

Union Govt. has been issuing such notifications a sample of which is annexed as Annexure IV.5.

4.2.12 Hence two serious legal lacunae exist as regards the protection of the Taj Monument. Firstly,

there is no notification by the U.P. Govt. u/s 19(1) of the Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act

1981 for declaring the TTZ as an air pollution control area. Second, there is no notification by the

Union Environment Ministry ii/s 3(2)(v) of the Environment, Protection Act, 1986 to declare the TTZ

as an ecological fragile area. In the absence of these two notifications the essential steps under these

two Acts to protect the Taj monument and other world heritage monuments in the TTZ area can not be

taken. Directions of this Hon'ble Court on this issue are urgently necessary.