Supreme Court Set to Review Retrospective Environmental Clearances for Public Projects
New Delhi: A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court on Monday (February 16) undertook a fresh review of retrospective grants for environmental clearances in construction projects in Vanashakti v Union of India.
The top court had set aside a May 2025 judgement, which barred ex post facto environmental clearance for such projects, in November last year.
On Monday, a bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi heard the matter and listed the case for a detailed hearing on February 25.
Petitioners argued that the November 2025 judgement had merely recalled the May judgement, without expressly reinstating the two office memorandums from 2017 and 2021 that allowed retrospective environmental clearances.
Background
On May 16, 2025, the apex court had quashed a 2017 notification and a 2021 Office Memorandum that allowed retrospective grants for environmental clearances. The court had said that those who carried out projects without adequate clearances would have been well aware of the illegality of their actions in its May judgement.
“The 2021 OM talks about the concept of development. Can there be development at the cost of the environment? Conservation of the environment and its improvement is an essential part of the concept of development. Therefore, going out of the way by issuing such OMs to protect those who have caused harm to the environment has to be deprecated by the courts… Even the Central government has a duty to protect and improve the natural environment,” Justice Abhay S. Oka had said.
However, in November, the top court allowed a review petition challenging the earlier verdict. The matter was heard by a bench headed by then CJI B.R. Gavai and Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and K. Vinod Chandran.
While recalling the May judgement, CJI Gavai said that public projects worth Rs 20,000 crore will have to be demolished if retrospective clearances are not allowed, adding that such demolitions would cause further pollution.
While Justice Chandran had ruled in favour of the clearances, Justice Bhuyan had strongly opposed them and penned a dissenting opinion saying that the concept of retrospective clearances was alien to environmental jurisprudence.
The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
