Supreme Court Upholds Environment Ministry Notification, Junks Exemption Clause For Big Projects
The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld the January 29 notification of the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, but struck down the contentious clause exempting certain large building and construction projects from prior environmental clearance.
A bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran held projects with a built-up area above 20,000 square meter, whether industrial, educational, or otherwise, cannot be exempted from the environment impact assessment (EIA) 2006 regime.
The court clarified that the notification would also apply to Kerala.
Dictating the order, the CJI said, "It has been consistently held that natural resources are to be held in trust for the next generation. At the same time, courts have always taken note of development activities and the country cannot progress without it." Observing the supreme court had always focused on sustainable development, the CJI said, "The court while ensuring that development is permitted has also required precaution to be taken so that least damage is caused to the environment and has even ordered costs to be paid for such development activities." The order said it would not be possible for the union ministry to consider projects across the country and therefore the issue could be considered on a state-to-state basis.
"If any construction activity in any area more than 20,000 sq km is carried out it will have environmental impact even if it's for industrial or educational purposes and discrimination cannot be made with similar such institutes," it said.
It also said that no exemption can be granted to the education sector in this regard.
"Nowadays education has also become a flourishing industry and thus no reason to exempt such projects from the 2006 notification," the CJI said.
The bench upheld the notification except clause 8 of the January 29 notification which grants exemptions to industrial sheds, schools, colleges, and hostels with built-up areas up to 150,000 square meter.
The bench said it was impractical for the MoEFCC to appraise every project nationwide, noting the Central Expert Appraisal Committee (CEA) could handle state-wise evaluations.
On February 25, the top court stayed the notification on a PIL filed by Mumbai-based NGO Vanashakti, which argued that the exemption diluted the EIA's safeguards and threatened eco-sensitive zones.
Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for the NGO, said similar attempts in 2014, 2016, and 2018 had been struck down or stayed by courts, including the Kerala High Court, the National Green Tribunal, and the Delhi High Court.
The petition claimed that bypassing EC for projects of such magnitude, exceeding 1.6 million square feet, would cause irreversible damage to land, water, and air quality, violating the precautionary principle entrenched in Indian environmental law.
Before the January 29 amendment, EIA 2006 required EC for all construction projects above 20,000 sq m The impugned notification raised the threshold to 150,000 sq m for certain categories and also removed "general conditions" applicable in eco-sensitive and polluted areas.
A follow-up office memorandum on January 30 expanded the scope of exemptions to include private universities, warehouses, and industrial sheds housing machinery or raw material.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
24 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Nitish Kumar's domicile policy before Bihar elections may not placate the youth
The Bihar government has announced a domicile policy for recruiting school teachers under the Teachers' Recruitment Exam 4 (TRE4). It has come after a long-drawn-out student agitation demanding reservation in government jobs based on domicile. In 2020, when the Nitish Kumar government brought in the domicile policy for the recruitment of school teachers, it was part of his election promises. However, it was scrapped in 2023 and led to massive protests. In its defence, the government argued that there was a shortage of competent and qualified candidates to teach some subjects, and it was also not legally tenable. Interestingly, the RJD was then the alliance partner. But later, Tejashwi Yadav cornered Kumar over the issue and promised that if his government gets elected, he would revive the domicile policy. It was, nevertheless, the newly born Jan Suraaj party that has highlighted the issue amidst slogans like: 'Vote de Bihari aur naukri le Bahri'. It is yet unclear whether the domicile policy would stand judicial scrutiny. As per reports, 85 per cent of the teachers recruited through TRE4 would be residents of Bihar. According to the amended rules, the students from Bihar state boards would be prioritised. Earlier, the government announced that only the 'permanent residents' of the state would be eligible to get the benefit of the women's reservations in government jobs. Reservations have always been a contentious issue across India. But politics over domicile policy is recently getting traction in the competitive populist discourse. The 'son of the soil' movement is not new to Indian politics. It is like freebies, masquerading as welfare measures and social justice that parties dole out on the eve of the elections. The domicile policy often works as a measure to cover for their failures in ensuring economic development and imparting quality education to the younger population, enabling them to enter the job market. Apart from the domicile policy, Nitish Kumar in recent months has announced a slew of populist schemes like 125 units of free electricity per month, a hike in honorarium of support staff in government schools, incentives for ASHA workers, a rise in social security pension, and the establishment of separate commissions for the youth and sanitation workers. The ageing and beleaguered CM is facing the most difficult election of his political career, with 20 years of anti-incumbency heavily stacked against him. His position in the NDA also looks shaky, as there is no firm commitment from the BJP on his future leadership. Chirag Paswan's LJP, despite being a part of the NDA, hardly misses any chance to snipe at him. The main opposition party, the RJD – the ghost of 'jungle raj' still haunting it and with no significant increase in its social base – has made unemployment a major poll issue. Tejashwi Yadav's continuous push for jobs, despite the inglorious track record of his own party, may offer it a ground to corner the NDA. In the 2020 Assembly election, he had come very close to victory with the poll slogan, 'Kamai-Dabai-Sichai'. This time, there is also a Prashant Kishore factor, which has made education, development and employment, along with mass migration of workers, key agendas of his electoral campaign. In the polarised social context of Bihar, unemployment, lack of industrialisation, and quality education seem to have turned a sizeable section of the youth into caste agnostics. The rhetoric of social justice has run its full course. It is unlikely that populist tactics, like domicile policy, reservation or freebies, would impact the electoral verdict in any significant way. The rest depends on the twists and turns of the coming election. The writer is professor, Political Science at Aryabhatta College, University of Delhi
The Hindu
24 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Centre promises to discuss restrictions on areca-based biodegradable plates by US
Union Ministry of Commerce and Industry has assured help to experts from Karnataka who had sought the Centre's intervention over the restrictions imposed by US authorities on the import of areca leaf sheath-based biodegradable dinnerware. The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had issued an import alert on May 8, imposing restrictions on biodegradable dinnerware made from arecanut leaf sheaths, including plates, cups, and related products. This had caused concern among scientists, experts, medical professionals and academicians from the areca growing areas of the State, as it would affect the prospects of areca farmers as well as entrepreneurs, since Karnataka is leading the country in these products. Over 100 people had written to the Centre on May 26 seeking Prime Minister Narendra Modi's intervention to lift the U.S. restrictions on biodegradable dinnerware. In the letter, the experts had alleged that such restrictions had been imposed based on ambiguous and unsubstantiated claims that naturally occurring alkaloids in the areca leaf sheath may migrate into food and may pose health risks. They said that the restrictions would undermine a culturally significant eco-friendly industry, and affect thousands of Indian entrepreneurs and farmers. Responding positively, the Union Ministry of Commerce and Industry has replied on July 1 to one of them – Darshan, a biotechnologist hailing from the State's areca-growing region, who was co-ordinating with experts. 'With regard to your representation concerning the restrictions imposed by U.S. FDA on areca leaf sheath-based biodegradable dinnerware, the government of India is engaging with the US authorities to address various non-tariff issues faced by Indian exporters accessing the US market,' states the official letter. 'The government remains committed to safeguarding the interests of India's sustainable industries and promoting fair, transparent, and non-discriminatory trade policies and is fervently promoting 'Mission LiFE' to promote environmentally conscious industries,' it stated, referring to the India-led global mass movement to nudge individual and community action to protect and preserve the environment Earlier, in their letter to the Centre, the experts had drawn attention to the sizeable global market share of areca-based dinnerware, which is currently valued at approximately ₹3,500 crore, and a number that is projected to double by 2030. Indicating Karnataka's prime position in exports of such products, they had said that around 1,000 metric tonnes of areca leaf dinnerware have been exported from New Mangalore Port of Karnataka, primarily to the US, as well as to Germany, the UK, Australia, Netherlands, and Canada.
Mint
24 minutes ago
- Mint
Modi-Trump showdown over tariffs and Russia trade—explained in 9 charts
A day after the US imposed an additional 25% reciprocal tariff on India, on top of an earlier 25%, Prime Minister Narendra Modi signalled that India was unwilling to offer concessions in agriculture and dairy. 'India will never compromise on the interests of farmers, fishermen and dairy farmers," Modi said, speaking at the MS Swaminathan Centenary International Conference in Delhi, today. 'I know personally, I will have to pay a heavy price for it, but I am ready for it." And there is indeed a heavy price to pay. The additional US tariffs have put India at a significant disadvantage compared to its peers. While some sectors like electronics and pharmaceuticals are shielded by exemptions, many labour-intensive segments such as textiles, organic chemicals and carpets will bear the brunt. These sectors were already subject to high tariffs under the most favoured nation (MFN) regime. Over the past month, India-US ties have deteriorated, largely due to a deadlock over a trade deal. At the heart of the impasse are Washington's demands for greater access to India's agriculture and dairy markets, in exchange for lowering reciprocal tariffs. While the initial 25% tariff in the absence of a deal was expected, the additional penalty, reportedly linked to India's trade with Russia, has drawn criticism. India has accused both the US and the European Union (EU) of hypocrisy for targeting it and Indian companies over continued trade with Moscow, even as those very countries maintain substantial commercial ties with Russia. Even after a sharp rise in India's trade with Russia (particularly on the back of oil), it has not surpassed the level of trade the EU has despite several sanctions since the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. However, when it comes to energy imports specifically, India is buying more from Russia than the EU does. The US, too, despite having cut down Russian imports, has continued to purchase key commodities like fertilisers, palladium, and uranium. Asked about the continued US import of Russian uranium, Trump did not offer a proper explanation. 'I don't know anything about it. I have to check it out," he said on this, many experts have also pointed out the US's double standards in taxing India, while China buys more Russian oil. China has not come under fire yet, as its trade deal negotiations with the US may come to fruition. Given the current circumstances, India does have the option to stop purchasing oil from Russia. Before the Ukraine war, India barely purchased oil from Russia. The Indian government has, time and again, claimed that the shift was made only at the request of Washington to keep crude oil prices in check. In a way, India can shift back its focus to its main oil trade partners from pre-war times, such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, among others. According to Nomura estimates, the cost of such a switch would be around $1.5 billion, assuming an average discount of $2.2 per barrel. That's a relatively small figure compared to India's total exports of $87 billion. So while India could stop buying Russian oil at minimal cost, many believe the latest US penalties are not entirely about Moscow. Rather, they reflect Washington's frustration with India's refusal to make the market access concessions it has long sought, a position the prime minister reinforced in his speech today. The escalating tensions have left India in a tight spot. It must now carefully balance the protection of domestic markets with safeguarding the interests of exporters, especially in vulnerable, labour-intensive sectors.
