Santosh Hegde, J. - (1.) All the respondents have filed their response indicating the steps taken by them in implementing the orders of this Court.
(2.) Shri M. C. Mehta, Petitioner-in-person requested the Court to first consider the steps taken by the respondents-States in regard to the 4th direction issued by this Court as per its order dated 22nd November, 1991 and consider other directions separately on any other subsequent date.
(3.) The direction No. 4 issued by this Court reads thus : "We accept on principle that through the medium of education awareness of the environment and its problems related to pollution should be taught as a compulsory subject. Learned Attorney General pointed out to us that the Central Government is associated with education at the higher levels and University Grants Commission can monitor only the Under-graduate and Post-graduate studies. The rest of it, according to him, is a State subject. He has agreed that the University Grants Commission will take appropriate steps immediately to give effect to what we have said, i.e. requiring the Universities to prescribe a course on environment. They would consider the feasibility of making this a compulsory subject at every level in college education. So far as education up to the college level is concerned, we would require every State Government and every Education Board connected with education up to the matriculation stage or even intermediate colleges to immediately take steps to enforce compulsory education on environment in a graded way. This should be so done that in the next academic year there would be compliance with this requirement" ;