The fading of India’s environmental jurisprudence, Pg8

Key Highlights:

• The policy of land acquisition before Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was changed on December 18, 2025, for non-coal mining projects.
• The Supreme Court recalled the Vanashakti vs Union Of India (2025) case, diluting environmental justice by allowing retrospective environmental clearances.
• Judicial sanctions were given for the destruction of 158 mangroves for Adani Cementation Limited in Raigarh, Maharashtra (2025).
• A June 2025 study identified 811 landslide zones along the Char Dham highway project in Uttarakhand.

Detailed Insights:

• The Aravallis are ecologically vital for north-western India, checking desertification, recharging groundwater, controlling micro-climates, and maintaining biodiversity; the court has previously recognized this ecological role in M.C. Mehta vs Union of India and Ors. (2004).
• The Supreme Court's acceptance of the 100-meter definition for the Aravalli hills in In Re: Issue Relating to Definition of Aravalli Hills and Ranges (2025), marks a departure from its 2010 stance, potentially depriving large portions of statutory and judicial protection.
• Dilution of environmental protection is evident in the undermining of the EIA process and the legalization of post-facto and conditional clearances, despite warnings in Common Cause vs Union of India (2017).
• Mangroves act as natural flood control systems, carbon sinks, and biodiversity reservoirs, protecting against storm surges and tidal flooding; allowing their destruction on the promise of compensatory afforestation is a setback.
• The Char Dham highway project poses grave dangers to the delicate Himalayan ecosystem, potentially triggering landslides and disturbing rivers, despite the court recognizing the area's ecological importance in Citizens for Green Doon vs Union of India (2021).
• Environmental clearances for corporations and large-scale infrastructure projects can easily pass through regulatory barriers, raising concerns about procedural fairness, transparency, and constitutional equality under Article 14.
• Courts have traditionally been custodians of environmental rights, holding that natural resources belong to the state and are held in trust for the people, as stated in M.C. Mehta vs Kamal Nath and Ors. (1996).

Key Concepts Involved:

• Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): A process to evaluate the environmental consequences of a proposed project or policy.
• Precautionary Principle: A strategy to avoid potentially serious or irreversible environmental damage, even in the absence of complete scientific certainty.
• Public Trust Doctrine: The principle that certain natural resources are preserved for public use, and the government holds these resources in trust for the people.