Question Description
On 7th May 2020, a major leakage of Styrene gas was reported from the plasticsmanufacturing plant LG Polymers located on the outskirts of the Visakhapatnam city. The accident took place when the cooling system of a polymers plant got clogged due to the mismanagement of factory workers and resulted in turning the city into a gas chamber. The gas which leaked was styrene gas, which is a ‘hazardous chemical’ under Rule 2(e) plus Entry 583 of Schedule I of the Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemical Rules 1989.Principle 1: Polluter Pays PrincipleThe Doctrine of Polluter Pays is a well-established principle of environmental law, which places an obligation of compensating the damage to the people who ought to reimburse it and also have the capacity to disburse it. The principle explicitly affirms that the person who damages or destructs the environment has the absolute obligation to bear the cost of ameliorat ing the environment. In Enviro Legal Action v. Union of India case, the Apex Court of India held that the polluter is legally responsible to reimburse the individual sufferers as well as pay for the revitalization of the damaged environment. PrinciplePrinciple2: Principle of Strict Liability The principle of Strict Liability was established in the year 1868 in the case of Rylands v. Fletcher, where the Court held that any person who uses his/her land in an unnatural manner and who keeps any hazardous substance on such premises would be held liable under the principle of strict liability for any damage occurred on the escape of such perilous substance. However, the person is liable only when there is non-natural use of land; the principle also restricts liability when the escape is due to an act of strangers, Act of God, for example a natural calamity; due to the person injured or when it happens with the consent of the person injured or with statutory authority.Principle 3: Principle of Absolute LiabilityThe absolute liability is a stringent form of Strict Liability as it is devoid of any exceptions that were mentioned under the earlier principle. for the first time in the case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India. This principle implies that whenever an enterprise is engaged in any dangerous or hazardous activity that threatens the people working in the enterprise and those living nearby, it owes an absolute and non-delegable duty to the community that no harm will be caused. If harm is indeed caused, the enterprise will have to compensate for damages, and can‘t use exceptions provided in the case of strict liability. The enterprise can‘t claim that the harm has not been caused due to negligence (absence of due care) or that it had taken all reasonable precautions.Q.A company ABC limited operates an industrial chemical plant in the city of Azadnagar. Due to an earthquake on July 22, 2020, the valves of the reactors in the plant get damaged due to which the operators could not properly transport the hazardous gas for chemical vaporisation, resulting in the gas leakage. The gas leakage resulted in the death of 12 workers of the plant and also some people living nearby the Plant. In this situation, in order to decipher the liability of ABC Limited, choose the best option:a)ABC Limited can be held liable under the principles of Strict and Absolute Liability and Polluter pays principle as wellb)ABC Limited can be held liable under the Polluter Pays Principle and the Principle of Absolute Liability, but can be exempted under the rule of Strict Liabilityc)ABC Limited will not be held liable under any of the Principlesd)ABC Limited will be held liable under Strict and Absolute Liability principles but the Principle of “Polluter Pays” will not be applicable to this situationCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared
according to
the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about On 7th May 2020, a major leakage of Styrene gas was reported from the plasticsmanufacturing plant LG Polymers located on the outskirts of the Visakhapatnam city. The accident took place when the cooling system of a polymers plant got clogged due to the mismanagement of factory workers and resulted in turning the city into a gas chamber. The gas which leaked was styrene gas, which is a ‘hazardous chemical’ under Rule 2(e) plus Entry 583 of Schedule I of the Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemical Rules 1989.Principle 1: Polluter Pays PrincipleThe Doctrine of Polluter Pays is a well-established principle of environmental law, which places an obligation of compensating the damage to the people who ought to reimburse it and also have the capacity to disburse it. The principle explicitly affirms that the person who damages or destructs the environment has the absolute obligation to bear the cost of ameliorat ing the environment. In Enviro Legal Action v. Union of India case, the Apex Court of India held that the polluter is legally responsible to reimburse the individual sufferers as well as pay for the revitalization of the damaged environment. PrinciplePrinciple2: Principle of Strict Liability The principle of Strict Liability was established in the year 1868 in the case of Rylands v. Fletcher, where the Court held that any person who uses his/her land in an unnatural manner and who keeps any hazardous substance on such premises would be held liable under the principle of strict liability for any damage occurred on the escape of such perilous substance. However, the person is liable only when there is non-natural use of land; the principle also restricts liability when the escape is due to an act of strangers, Act of God, for example a natural calamity; due to the person injured or when it happens with the consent of the person injured or with statutory authority.Principle 3: Principle of Absolute LiabilityThe absolute liability is a stringent form of Strict Liability as it is devoid of any exceptions that were mentioned under the earlier principle. for the first time in the case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India. This principle implies that whenever an enterprise is engaged in any dangerous or hazardous activity that threatens the people working in the enterprise and those living nearby, it owes an absolute and non-delegable duty to the community that no harm will be caused. If harm is indeed caused, the enterprise will have to compensate for damages, and can‘t use exceptions provided in the case of strict liability. The enterprise can‘t claim that the harm has not been caused due to negligence (absence of due care) or that it had taken all reasonable precautions.Q.A company ABC limited operates an industrial chemical plant in the city of Azadnagar. Due to an earthquake on July 22, 2020, the valves of the reactors in the plant get damaged due to which the operators could not properly transport the hazardous gas for chemical vaporisation, resulting in the gas leakage. The gas leakage resulted in the death of 12 workers of the plant and also some people living nearby the Plant. In this situation, in order to decipher the liability of ABC Limited, choose the best option:a)ABC Limited can be held liable under the principles of Strict and Absolute Liability and Polluter pays principle as wellb)ABC Limited can be held liable under the Polluter Pays Principle and the Principle of Absolute Liability, but can be exempted under the rule of Strict Liabilityc)ABC Limited will not be held liable under any of the Principlesd)ABC Limited will be held liable under Strict and Absolute Liability principles but the Principle of “Polluter Pays” will not be applicable to this situationCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam.
Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for On 7th May 2020, a major leakage of Styrene gas was reported from the plasticsmanufacturing plant LG Polymers located on the outskirts of the Visakhapatnam city. The accident took place when the cooling system of a polymers plant got clogged due to the mismanagement of factory workers and resulted in turning the city into a gas chamber. The gas which leaked was styrene gas, which is a ‘hazardous chemical’ under Rule 2(e) plus Entry 583 of Schedule I of the Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemical Rules 1989.Principle 1: Polluter Pays PrincipleThe Doctrine of Polluter Pays is a well-established principle of environmental law, which places an obligation of compensating the damage to the people who ought to reimburse it and also have the capacity to disburse it. The principle explicitly affirms that the person who damages or destructs the environment has the absolute obligation to bear the cost of ameliorat ing the environment. In Enviro Legal Action v. Union of India case, the Apex Court of India held that the polluter is legally responsible to reimburse the individual sufferers as well as pay for the revitalization of the damaged environment. PrinciplePrinciple2: Principle of Strict Liability The principle of Strict Liability was established in the year 1868 in the case of Rylands v. Fletcher, where the Court held that any person who uses his/her land in an unnatural manner and who keeps any hazardous substance on such premises would be held liable under the principle of strict liability for any damage occurred on the escape of such perilous substance. However, the person is liable only when there is non-natural use of land; the principle also restricts liability when the escape is due to an act of strangers, Act of God, for example a natural calamity; due to the person injured or when it happens with the consent of the person injured or with statutory authority.Principle 3: Principle of Absolute LiabilityThe absolute liability is a stringent form of Strict Liability as it is devoid of any exceptions that were mentioned under the earlier principle. for the first time in the case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India. This principle implies that whenever an enterprise is engaged in any dangerous or hazardous activity that threatens the people working in the enterprise and those living nearby, it owes an absolute and non-delegable duty to the community that no harm will be caused. If harm is indeed caused, the enterprise will have to compensate for damages, and can‘t use exceptions provided in the case of strict liability. The enterprise can‘t claim that the harm has not been caused due to negligence (absence of due care) or that it had taken all reasonable precautions.Q.A company ABC limited operates an industrial chemical plant in the city of Azadnagar. Due to an earthquake on July 22, 2020, the valves of the reactors in the plant get damaged due to which the operators could not properly transport the hazardous gas for chemical vaporisation, resulting in the gas leakage. The gas leakage resulted in the death of 12 workers of the plant and also some people living nearby the Plant. In this situation, in order to decipher the liability of ABC Limited, choose the best option:a)ABC Limited can be held liable under the principles of Strict and Absolute Liability and Polluter pays principle as wellb)ABC Limited can be held liable under the Polluter Pays Principle and the Principle of Absolute Liability, but can be exempted under the rule of Strict Liabilityc)ABC Limited will not be held liable under any of the Principlesd)ABC Limited will be held liable under Strict and Absolute Liability principles but the Principle of “Polluter Pays” will not be applicable to this situationCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for On 7th May 2020, a major leakage of Styrene gas was reported from the plasticsmanufacturing plant LG Polymers located on the outskirts of the Visakhapatnam city. The accident took place when the cooling system of a polymers plant got clogged due to the mismanagement of factory workers and resulted in turning the city into a gas chamber. The gas which leaked was styrene gas, which is a ‘hazardous chemical’ under Rule 2(e) plus Entry 583 of Schedule I of the Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemical Rules 1989.Principle 1: Polluter Pays PrincipleThe Doctrine of Polluter Pays is a well-established principle of environmental law, which places an obligation of compensating the damage to the people who ought to reimburse it and also have the capacity to disburse it. The principle explicitly affirms that the person who damages or destructs the environment has the absolute obligation to bear the cost of ameliorat ing the environment. In Enviro Legal Action v. Union of India case, the Apex Court of India held that the polluter is legally responsible to reimburse the individual sufferers as well as pay for the revitalization of the damaged environment. PrinciplePrinciple2: Principle of Strict Liability The principle of Strict Liability was established in the year 1868 in the case of Rylands v. Fletcher, where the Court held that any person who uses his/her land in an unnatural manner and who keeps any hazardous substance on such premises would be held liable under the principle of strict liability for any damage occurred on the escape of such perilous substance. However, the person is liable only when there is non-natural use of land; the principle also restricts liability when the escape is due to an act of strangers, Act of God, for example a natural calamity; due to the person injured or when it happens with the consent of the person injured or with statutory authority.Principle 3: Principle of Absolute LiabilityThe absolute liability is a stringent form of Strict Liability as it is devoid of any exceptions that were mentioned under the earlier principle. for the first time in the case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India. This principle implies that whenever an enterprise is engaged in any dangerous or hazardous activity that threatens the people working in the enterprise and those living nearby, it owes an absolute and non-delegable duty to the community that no harm will be caused. If harm is indeed caused, the enterprise will have to compensate for damages, and can‘t use exceptions provided in the case of strict liability. The enterprise can‘t claim that the harm has not been caused due to negligence (absence of due care) or that it had taken all reasonable precautions.Q.A company ABC limited operates an industrial chemical plant in the city of Azadnagar. Due to an earthquake on July 22, 2020, the valves of the reactors in the plant get damaged due to which the operators could not properly transport the hazardous gas for chemical vaporisation, resulting in the gas leakage. The gas leakage resulted in the death of 12 workers of the plant and also some people living nearby the Plant. In this situation, in order to decipher the liability of ABC Limited, choose the best option:a)ABC Limited can be held liable under the principles of Strict and Absolute Liability and Polluter pays principle as wellb)ABC Limited can be held liable under the Polluter Pays Principle and the Principle of Absolute Liability, but can be exempted under the rule of Strict Liabilityc)ABC Limited will not be held liable under any of the Principlesd)ABC Limited will be held liable under Strict and Absolute Liability principles but the Principle of “Polluter Pays” will not be applicable to this situationCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT.
Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of On 7th May 2020, a major leakage of Styrene gas was reported from the plasticsmanufacturing plant LG Polymers located on the outskirts of the Visakhapatnam city. The accident took place when the cooling system of a polymers plant got clogged due to the mismanagement of factory workers and resulted in turning the city into a gas chamber. The gas which leaked was styrene gas, which is a ‘hazardous chemical’ under Rule 2(e) plus Entry 583 of Schedule I of the Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemical Rules 1989.Principle 1: Polluter Pays PrincipleThe Doctrine of Polluter Pays is a well-established principle of environmental law, which places an obligation of compensating the damage to the people who ought to reimburse it and also have the capacity to disburse it. The principle explicitly affirms that the person who damages or destructs the environment has the absolute obligation to bear the cost of ameliorat ing the environment. In Enviro Legal Action v. Union of India case, the Apex Court of India held that the polluter is legally responsible to reimburse the individual sufferers as well as pay for the revitalization of the damaged environment. PrinciplePrinciple2: Principle of Strict Liability The principle of Strict Liability was established in the year 1868 in the case of Rylands v. Fletcher, where the Court held that any person who uses his/her land in an unnatural manner and who keeps any hazardous substance on such premises would be held liable under the principle of strict liability for any damage occurred on the escape of such perilous substance. However, the person is liable only when there is non-natural use of land; the principle also restricts liability when the escape is due to an act of strangers, Act of God, for example a natural calamity; due to the person injured or when it happens with the consent of the person injured or with statutory authority.Principle 3: Principle of Absolute LiabilityThe absolute liability is a stringent form of Strict Liability as it is devoid of any exceptions that were mentioned under the earlier principle. for the first time in the case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India. This principle implies that whenever an enterprise is engaged in any dangerous or hazardous activity that threatens the people working in the enterprise and those living nearby, it owes an absolute and non-delegable duty to the community that no harm will be caused. If harm is indeed caused, the enterprise will have to compensate for damages, and can‘t use exceptions provided in the case of strict liability. The enterprise can‘t claim that the harm has not been caused due to negligence (absence of due care) or that it had taken all reasonable precautions.Q.A company ABC limited operates an industrial chemical plant in the city of Azadnagar. Due to an earthquake on July 22, 2020, the valves of the reactors in the plant get damaged due to which the operators could not properly transport the hazardous gas for chemical vaporisation, resulting in the gas leakage. The gas leakage resulted in the death of 12 workers of the plant and also some people living nearby the Plant. In this situation, in order to decipher the liability of ABC Limited, choose the best option:a)ABC Limited can be held liable under the principles of Strict and Absolute Liability and Polluter pays principle as wellb)ABC Limited can be held liable under the Polluter Pays Principle and the Principle of Absolute Liability, but can be exempted under the rule of Strict Liabilityc)ABC Limited will not be held liable under any of the Principlesd)ABC Limited will be held liable under Strict and Absolute Liability principles but the Principle of “Polluter Pays” will not be applicable to this situationCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of
On 7th May 2020, a major leakage of Styrene gas was reported from the plasticsmanufacturing plant LG Polymers located on the outskirts of the Visakhapatnam city. The accident took place when the cooling system of a polymers plant got clogged due to the mismanagement of factory workers and resulted in turning the city into a gas chamber. The gas which leaked was styrene gas, which is a ‘hazardous chemical’ under Rule 2(e) plus Entry 583 of Schedule I of the Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemical Rules 1989.Principle 1: Polluter Pays PrincipleThe Doctrine of Polluter Pays is a well-established principle of environmental law, which places an obligation of compensating the damage to the people who ought to reimburse it and also have the capacity to disburse it. The principle explicitly affirms that the person who damages or destructs the environment has the absolute obligation to bear the cost of ameliorat ing the environment. In Enviro Legal Action v. Union of India case, the Apex Court of India held that the polluter is legally responsible to reimburse the individual sufferers as well as pay for the revitalization of the damaged environment. PrinciplePrinciple2: Principle of Strict Liability The principle of Strict Liability was established in the year 1868 in the case of Rylands v. Fletcher, where the Court held that any person who uses his/her land in an unnatural manner and who keeps any hazardous substance on such premises would be held liable under the principle of strict liability for any damage occurred on the escape of such perilous substance. However, the person is liable only when there is non-natural use of land; the principle also restricts liability when the escape is due to an act of strangers, Act of God, for example a natural calamity; due to the person injured or when it happens with the consent of the person injured or with statutory authority.Principle 3: Principle of Absolute LiabilityThe absolute liability is a stringent form of Strict Liability as it is devoid of any exceptions that were mentioned under the earlier principle. for the first time in the case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India. This principle implies that whenever an enterprise is engaged in any dangerous or hazardous activity that threatens the people working in the enterprise and those living nearby, it owes an absolute and non-delegable duty to the community that no harm will be caused. If harm is indeed caused, the enterprise will have to compensate for damages, and can‘t use exceptions provided in the case of strict liability. The enterprise can‘t claim that the harm has not been caused due to negligence (absence of due care) or that it had taken all reasonable precautions.Q.A company ABC limited operates an industrial chemical plant in the city of Azadnagar. Due to an earthquake on July 22, 2020, the valves of the reactors in the plant get damaged due to which the operators could not properly transport the hazardous gas for chemical vaporisation, resulting in the gas leakage. The gas leakage resulted in the death of 12 workers of the plant and also some people living nearby the Plant. In this situation, in order to decipher the liability of ABC Limited, choose the best option:a)ABC Limited can be held liable under the principles of Strict and Absolute Liability and Polluter pays principle as wellb)ABC Limited can be held liable under the Polluter Pays Principle and the Principle of Absolute Liability, but can be exempted under the rule of Strict Liabilityc)ABC Limited will not be held liable under any of the Principlesd)ABC Limited will be held liable under Strict and Absolute Liability principles but the Principle of “Polluter Pays” will not be applicable to this situationCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for On 7th May 2020, a major leakage of Styrene gas was reported from the plasticsmanufacturing plant LG Polymers located on the outskirts of the Visakhapatnam city. The accident took place when the cooling system of a polymers plant got clogged due to the mismanagement of factory workers and resulted in turning the city into a gas chamber. The gas which leaked was styrene gas, which is a ‘hazardous chemical’ under Rule 2(e) plus Entry 583 of Schedule I of the Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemical Rules 1989.Principle 1: Polluter Pays PrincipleThe Doctrine of Polluter Pays is a well-established principle of environmental law, which places an obligation of compensating the damage to the people who ought to reimburse it and also have the capacity to disburse it. The principle explicitly affirms that the person who damages or destructs the environment has the absolute obligation to bear the cost of ameliorat ing the environment. In Enviro Legal Action v. Union of India case, the Apex Court of India held that the polluter is legally responsible to reimburse the individual sufferers as well as pay for the revitalization of the damaged environment. PrinciplePrinciple2: Principle of Strict Liability The principle of Strict Liability was established in the year 1868 in the case of Rylands v. Fletcher, where the Court held that any person who uses his/her land in an unnatural manner and who keeps any hazardous substance on such premises would be held liable under the principle of strict liability for any damage occurred on the escape of such perilous substance. However, the person is liable only when there is non-natural use of land; the principle also restricts liability when the escape is due to an act of strangers, Act of God, for example a natural calamity; due to the person injured or when it happens with the consent of the person injured or with statutory authority.Principle 3: Principle of Absolute LiabilityThe absolute liability is a stringent form of Strict Liability as it is devoid of any exceptions that were mentioned under the earlier principle. for the first time in the case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India. This principle implies that whenever an enterprise is engaged in any dangerous or hazardous activity that threatens the people working in the enterprise and those living nearby, it owes an absolute and non-delegable duty to the community that no harm will be caused. If harm is indeed caused, the enterprise will have to compensate for damages, and can‘t use exceptions provided in the case of strict liability. The enterprise can‘t claim that the harm has not been caused due to negligence (absence of due care) or that it had taken all reasonable precautions.Q.A company ABC limited operates an industrial chemical plant in the city of Azadnagar. Due to an earthquake on July 22, 2020, the valves of the reactors in the plant get damaged due to which the operators could not properly transport the hazardous gas for chemical vaporisation, resulting in the gas leakage. The gas leakage resulted in the death of 12 workers of the plant and also some people living nearby the Plant. In this situation, in order to decipher the liability of ABC Limited, choose the best option:a)ABC Limited can be held liable under the principles of Strict and Absolute Liability and Polluter pays principle as wellb)ABC Limited can be held liable under the Polluter Pays Principle and the Principle of Absolute Liability, but can be exempted under the rule of Strict Liabilityc)ABC Limited will not be held liable under any of the Principlesd)ABC Limited will be held liable under Strict and Absolute Liability principles but the Principle of “Polluter Pays” will not be applicable to this situationCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of On 7th May 2020, a major leakage of Styrene gas was reported from the plasticsmanufacturing plant LG Polymers located on the outskirts of the Visakhapatnam city. The accident took place when the cooling system of a polymers plant got clogged due to the mismanagement of factory workers and resulted in turning the city into a gas chamber. The gas which leaked was styrene gas, which is a ‘hazardous chemical’ under Rule 2(e) plus Entry 583 of Schedule I of the Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemical Rules 1989.Principle 1: Polluter Pays PrincipleThe Doctrine of Polluter Pays is a well-established principle of environmental law, which places an obligation of compensating the damage to the people who ought to reimburse it and also have the capacity to disburse it. The principle explicitly affirms that the person who damages or destructs the environment has the absolute obligation to bear the cost of ameliorat ing the environment. In Enviro Legal Action v. Union of India case, the Apex Court of India held that the polluter is legally responsible to reimburse the individual sufferers as well as pay for the revitalization of the damaged environment. PrinciplePrinciple2: Principle of Strict Liability The principle of Strict Liability was established in the year 1868 in the case of Rylands v. Fletcher, where the Court held that any person who uses his/her land in an unnatural manner and who keeps any hazardous substance on such premises would be held liable under the principle of strict liability for any damage occurred on the escape of such perilous substance. However, the person is liable only when there is non-natural use of land; the principle also restricts liability when the escape is due to an act of strangers, Act of God, for example a natural calamity; due to the person injured or when it happens with the consent of the person injured or with statutory authority.Principle 3: Principle of Absolute LiabilityThe absolute liability is a stringent form of Strict Liability as it is devoid of any exceptions that were mentioned under the earlier principle. for the first time in the case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India. This principle implies that whenever an enterprise is engaged in any dangerous or hazardous activity that threatens the people working in the enterprise and those living nearby, it owes an absolute and non-delegable duty to the community that no harm will be caused. If harm is indeed caused, the enterprise will have to compensate for damages, and can‘t use exceptions provided in the case of strict liability. The enterprise can‘t claim that the harm has not been caused due to negligence (absence of due care) or that it had taken all reasonable precautions.Q.A company ABC limited operates an industrial chemical plant in the city of Azadnagar. Due to an earthquake on July 22, 2020, the valves of the reactors in the plant get damaged due to which the operators could not properly transport the hazardous gas for chemical vaporisation, resulting in the gas leakage. The gas leakage resulted in the death of 12 workers of the plant and also some people living nearby the Plant. In this situation, in order to decipher the liability of ABC Limited, choose the best option:a)ABC Limited can be held liable under the principles of Strict and Absolute Liability and Polluter pays principle as wellb)ABC Limited can be held liable under the Polluter Pays Principle and the Principle of Absolute Liability, but can be exempted under the rule of Strict Liabilityc)ABC Limited will not be held liable under any of the Principlesd)ABC Limited will be held liable under Strict and Absolute Liability principles but the Principle of “Polluter Pays” will not be applicable to this situationCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an
ample number of questions to practice On 7th May 2020, a major leakage of Styrene gas was reported from the plasticsmanufacturing plant LG Polymers located on the outskirts of the Visakhapatnam city. The accident took place when the cooling system of a polymers plant got clogged due to the mismanagement of factory workers and resulted in turning the city into a gas chamber. The gas which leaked was styrene gas, which is a ‘hazardous chemical’ under Rule 2(e) plus Entry 583 of Schedule I of the Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemical Rules 1989.Principle 1: Polluter Pays PrincipleThe Doctrine of Polluter Pays is a well-established principle of environmental law, which places an obligation of compensating the damage to the people who ought to reimburse it and also have the capacity to disburse it. The principle explicitly affirms that the person who damages or destructs the environment has the absolute obligation to bear the cost of ameliorat ing the environment. In Enviro Legal Action v. Union of India case, the Apex Court of India held that the polluter is legally responsible to reimburse the individual sufferers as well as pay for the revitalization of the damaged environment. PrinciplePrinciple2: Principle of Strict Liability The principle of Strict Liability was established in the year 1868 in the case of Rylands v. Fletcher, where the Court held that any person who uses his/her land in an unnatural manner and who keeps any hazardous substance on such premises would be held liable under the principle of strict liability for any damage occurred on the escape of such perilous substance. However, the person is liable only when there is non-natural use of land; the principle also restricts liability when the escape is due to an act of strangers, Act of God, for example a natural calamity; due to the person injured or when it happens with the consent of the person injured or with statutory authority.Principle 3: Principle of Absolute LiabilityThe absolute liability is a stringent form of Strict Liability as it is devoid of any exceptions that were mentioned under the earlier principle. for the first time in the case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India. This principle implies that whenever an enterprise is engaged in any dangerous or hazardous activity that threatens the people working in the enterprise and those living nearby, it owes an absolute and non-delegable duty to the community that no harm will be caused. If harm is indeed caused, the enterprise will have to compensate for damages, and can‘t use exceptions provided in the case of strict liability. The enterprise can‘t claim that the harm has not been caused due to negligence (absence of due care) or that it had taken all reasonable precautions.Q.A company ABC limited operates an industrial chemical plant in the city of Azadnagar. Due to an earthquake on July 22, 2020, the valves of the reactors in the plant get damaged due to which the operators could not properly transport the hazardous gas for chemical vaporisation, resulting in the gas leakage. The gas leakage resulted in the death of 12 workers of the plant and also some people living nearby the Plant. In this situation, in order to decipher the liability of ABC Limited, choose the best option:a)ABC Limited can be held liable under the principles of Strict and Absolute Liability and Polluter pays principle as wellb)ABC Limited can be held liable under the Polluter Pays Principle and the Principle of Absolute Liability, but can be exempted under the rule of Strict Liabilityc)ABC Limited will not be held liable under any of the Principlesd)ABC Limited will be held liable under Strict and Absolute Liability principles but the Principle of “Polluter Pays” will not be applicable to this situationCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.