Coca-Cola & Pepsi Harm India's Ecology

Once the controversy erupted, many people suddenly found that they had something to say about the issue. Analysts felt that companies opted for this mode of advertisement since it was very cost-effective - they only had to invest in the paint and labor.

Since they did not seek permission from the government, to whom the land belonged, they did not have to make any payment in this regard.

The advertisements ranged in size from 10 square feet (sq.ft.) to about 100 sq.ft. Most of the Coke and Pepsi advertisements were between 10 to 20 sq.ft. each, with many smaller ones (painted by other companies) in clusters along the road and the river bed...

This case was regarded by many corporates, lawyers and environmentalists as one of the fastest to be resolved - the court took a little more than a month to convict those who were found guilty and order restoration work (Refer Exhibit IV for a timeline of the case). Applauding the court's decision, Professor C K Varshney, School of Environmental Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, said, "This is really a decision in the right direction, and perhaps ought to have been taken long back, for it really sets the rigor India needs in dealing with environmental issues. Such defacing of rocks is not something restricted to the Himalayas in India. I have seen this across the country. In supporting the protection of nature in its original form, in whatever way possible, the courts have set a great precedent"...