April 12, 1999:  TELCO slaps Rs 100 crore suit on the authors
The article did not mention TELCO at all. However, the industry slapped a Rs 100 crore suit on the authors Anil Agarwal and Sunita Narain. The notice sent to the authors read that they had, by giving the title of the article "The Engines of the Devil", implied and conveyed that TELCO was guilty of manufacturing vehicles containing "engines of the devil". It objected to the statement, "Diesel, a highly toxic pollutant, is being increasingly favoured by Indian auto manufacturers". The article according to TELCO said that the company was out to harm the health and lives of the people.

The enclosed apology that TELCO wanted from the authors was drafted to read: "We (the authors) wrongly singled out TELCO in the article even though there are several manufacturers who manufacture diesel vehicles in India."

April 26, 1999:  CSE sends reply to the legal notice
Dear Sir/Madam,

This is with reference to your legal notice of April 12, 1999 on behalf of your clients, Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. Ltd (TELCO). The notice that was hand delivered to our office on April 16 has been served on us as authors of the article, Engines of Devil, published in the Business Standard on March 16, 1999 and seeks damages of Rs. 100 crore from us.

At the very outset we would like to inform your clients that we stand by every word we have written in the article and in fact, remain very deeply concerned by the dangers posed by the toxicity of diesel emissions and its impact on public health. Furthermore, the article does not target or single out your client nor does it bear any malice or is motivated against your client as suggested by you.

Our interest is and will remain in public interest and your allegations that our article is "false, derogatory and defamatory" are a figment of your imagination.

The use of the photograph, selected by Business Standard staff, simply as a visual representation of the issues we have raised in our article, cannot be taken out of context and blown out of proportion. The article objectively analyses the effects of the toxic pollutants in diesel exhaust and its impact on public health and, therefore, its implications for public policy. This is a matter of legitimate public interest.

However, we would be grateful for a small clarification from you. In the enclosed apology you would have liked us to give, you mention that "The article, together with the said photograph depicted therein, implied that TELCO were quilty of manufacturing diesel vehicles such as ‘Tata Sumo’ and ‘Tata Sierra’ as they are fitted with the so called "engines of the devil". "We are confused as it seems that your clients are denying manufacturing diesel vehicles. Please let us know if your client plans to discontinue the manufacture of diesel cars, as it would have enormous bearings on how we may wish to proceed further.

We realise that this is not a legal reply to your legal notice and we reserve the right to do so if and when necessary.

We look forward to hearing from you and, if necessary, to seeing you in court.

With Best wishes,

Yours cordially

Anil Agarwal
Sunita Narain

May 4, 1999:  CSE calls press conference
Environmentalists are threatened with Rs. 100 crore legal suit by TELCO for their campaign against private diesel cars. They tell TELCO not to threaten not to threaten but to take them to court.

DELHI, 4-5-1999: Environmental researchers, Anil Agarwal and Sunita Narain, today told the press that they were not going to be intimidated by a legal notice seeking damages worth Rs.100 crore served on them by the automobile giant, TELCO. "At a time when pollution is growing rapidly with serious consequences for public health, we cannot let industrial firms feel that they can get away by threatening us with dire consequences," said Agarwal and Narain at a press conference. "We have told TELCO’s lawyers that we are quite happy to see them in court. It is our life’s work, convictions, integrity and research that is at stake," they added.

Agarwal and Narain had jointly written an article against the current trend in the automobile industry to sell diesel cars pointing out that there is growing evidence worldwide that diesel exhaust has some of the strongest carcinogens in the world and several countries were tightening regulations against diesel vehicles. In India, the quality of both diesel engines and diesel fuel is very poor compared to international standards. The article had pointed out that the industry was ignoring this evidence.

TELCO has said that a picture carried with the article had singled the company out as a polluter. Instead of admitting the seriousness of the issue raised in the article and taking appropriate action, the company is looking for technicalities to gag us, said Agarwal and Narain. "We are prepared to face the consequences and have told the company that we stand by every word we have written," they added.

Agarwal and Narain said that every effort must be made to control pollution. A study conducted by the Centre for Science and Environment has shown that during 1975 and 1995 whereas the Indian GDP grew only by about 2.5 per cent, the annual vehicular pollution grew by about 8 times. "Not surprisingly, more and more Indian towns and cities are gasping for clean air today, " said Agarwal and Narain. "Forget the big cities like Delhi, even erstwhile clean towns like Dehra Dun, Agartala and Srinagar were suffering from pollution. One monitoring station in Dehra Dun recorded the highest pollution in the country in 1995 ," said Agarwal and Narain. As only a tiny fraction of urban Indians have motorised vehicles today, the process of ‘motorisation’ is going to grow rapidly in the years to come and, therefore, what is bad today is going to become a living hell today unless we take strong action to prevent such a scenario, pointed out Agarwal and Narain. Therefore, we cannot buckle under threats from companies like TELCO.

Anil Agarwal and Sunita Narain are director and deputy director of the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), a leading public interest research organisation. CSE has been producing studies that point out that as diesel vehicles contribute heavily to pollution from carcinogenic particles. Furthermore, as the pollution level from particles is already one of the worst in the world in cities like Delhi, CSE has been asking for a rapid reduction in the use of diesel and a ban on private diesel cars.

TELCO’s notice to Agarwal and Narain may be linked to the fact that Agarwal is a member of the Environmental Pollution Control Authority for the National Capital Region and the Supreme Court is already hearing a recommendation from the Authority suggesting a ban on private diesel cars. It is during these hearings that the Supreme Court recently ordered the preponement of the application of EURO-I and EURO-II vehicular emission norms to June 1, 1999 and March 31, 2000 and has put a limit on all cars with current emission norms, including diesel cars. This preponement means that EURO-I norms have to be applied nine months in advance of government orders EURO-II norms five years in advance. As TELCO is heavily into diesel trucks and buses and is now launching a diesel-based small car called Indica, which has obtained a high number of orders in Delhi, CSE’s campaign threatens TELCO’s economic interests.

For more information contact Anumita Roychowdhury, or Chandrachur Ghosh at CSE, Tel. Nos. 6981124, 6981110, 6983394

May 9, 1999:  Rs 100 crore suit dropped for this "clarification"!
A one and half inch, single column clarification that appeared in the Business Standard states, "The article ‘The Engines of Devil’ published in Business Standard on March 16 referred to the automobile industry as a whole, and not any one company or its products. As is well known, there are at least ten manufacturers of diesel vehicles in India." However, while backing out, TELCO sent a more interesting note to Anil Agarwal and Sunita Narain which highlighted that there would be no question of any proceeding against the authors.

Dear Sir/Madam

We refer to your reply dated 26 April 1999 (received by us on fax on 28 April) in response to our notice no. BHA/HV/9478 dated 12 April served on behalf of our client, Tata Engineering & Locomotive Company Limited (TELCO).
At the very outset, TELCO would like to clarify that had your article appeared in Business Standard or in any other paper, without the publishing of a photograph of TELCO’s vehicles, TELCO would not have got offended. It was the photograph, as conspicuously positioned, just below the sensational caption, "The Engines of the Devil", which is libellous.
You have stated the photograph was selected and used by the staff of Business Standard. As the insertion of the photograph in the article was not at your instance, TELCO should not have any misunderstanding of your motive. We are told that Business Standard, to whom our notice was primarily served as the Publisher, has been in touch with Tatas. As we understand, they have arrived at some understanding and, therefore, as it now appears, it is a matter between them two.
You stated, "We remain deeply concerned by the dangers posed by the toxicity of diesel emissions and its impact on public health", which is laudable. TELCO stands equally committed to the larger issues of environmental pollution. Telco has been manufacturing vehicles which are strictly within the emission norms. As you may be aware, TELCO has been pleading that not only the emission norms prescribed by the Government be advanced but also they be rigorously enforced. Also TELCO is the first manufacturer in the country to introduce environment-friendly EuroI diesel engines (of Cummins of US) on commercial vehicles. The Cummins engine is internationally rated as one of the greenest engines.
It is not that only diesel, as an automotive fuel, that is polluting. The recent studies reveal that petrol is as toxic as diesel. TELCO does not want to get involved in this debate or controversy, particularly as the Hon’ble Supreme Court has been seized of this issue in a proceeding before it. TELCO’s submission is that while both the fuels, diesel and petrol, would be harmful if they exceed certain limits in their emissions, the remedy on a positive approach, should be an endeavour to prescribe and enforce strictly and uniformly the emission norms so that all vehicular pollution will remain within control.

There should not be any confusion: what we stated was that TELCO denied manufacturing any vehicles which were "The Engines of the Devil". We clarify that Telco would continue to manufacture diesel vehicles which will conform to uniformly laid out standards applicable to all non commercial vehicles.

Incidentally, your reply to us is on the letterhead of " Centre for Science and Environment". TELCO categorically affirms that it has no grievance at all with the Centre which is working for a public cause. Our notice to you individually was based on your names appearing as the authors of the Business Standard article.

As we understand, you have, through a press release done through the auspices of the Centre, linked TELCO’s action (viz. its issuing through us the said notice of defamation on Business Standard and you) with the proceeding before the Supreme Court. Telco’s action (which was based on the libel and which was primarily against the Business Standard and which is a private case between the parties) had nothing to do with the case before the Supreme Court, which, as you know, was on a larger issue (i.e., about a proposal made by Environment Pollution (Prevention and Control) Authority, popularly known as "Bhurelal Committee", of which you, Mr. Anil Agarwal are a member, for banning light non-commercial vehicles in the National Capital Region. TELCO emphasises that it holds the Bhurelal Committee in great respect and it will continue to co-operate with it in its deliberations. There is clearly a misunderstanding in the linking of our notice with the case in the Supreme Court. Here, as the solicitors of TELCO, we must explain that when we issued the notice, we were not aware that one of the authors of the article was a member of the Bhurelal Committee nor we were aware that the committee submitted its report on 1 April.

We understand that the notice was hand-delivered to you at the Centre on 16 April (i.e., the day when the Supreme Court was hearing the case on the Committee’s Report). We must mention that as you will see from the notice itself, we despatched the said notice to you both at the address "C/o Business Standard, 3rd and 4th floor, Bldg ‘H’, Paragon Condominium, Opp. Century Mills, P B Marg, Worli, Mumbai-400018". If it was hand-delivered to you at the office of the Centre, as we were informed, on 16 April, it must have been done by the office of Business Standard.

In view of your explanation, TELCO has conveyed to us that there would be no question of any proceeding against you.