SC Recalls Verdict Blocking Retrospective Environmental Clearances | 21 Nov 2025

Source: TH

Why in News? 

In a 2:1 ruling, the Supreme Court of India struck down the 2025 Vanashakti judgment banning ex post facto or retrospective Environmental Clearances (ECs), stating that its continuation would cause “devastating” consequences and put thousands of crores of public investment at risk.

• This ruling was based on the idea that it allowed violators of environmental laws to circumvent legal requirements, undermining efforts to protect the environment.

What are Ex Post Facto Environmental Clearances?

• Meaning: Approvals granted after a project has already begun construction, expansion, or operation without obtaining the mandatory prior Environmental Clearance (EC).
• Purpose: Intended for rare, exceptional cases but often used to regularise violations by allowing developers to “legalise” work already carried out illegally.
• Legal Framework: The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Notifications of 1994 and 2006 are built on the principle of prior environmental clearance, requiring major industrial and construction projects to begin only after their environmental impacts have been assessed and approved.
• SC’s Vanashakti Judgment, 2025 on Ex Post Facto ECs: The Vanashakti judgment struck down the 2017 notification and 2021 office memorandum (OM) issued by the MoEFCC that allowed ex post facto (retrospective) environmental clearances.
  
  • The Court held that retrospective ECs are a “gross illegality” and an “anathema” to environmental jurisprudence, as they violate the precautionary principle that demands environmental harm be prevented before it occurs.
    • It criticised attempts to let projects begin without approval and barred the Centre from issuing any future notifications permitting retrospective ECs.

Why did the SC Recall the 2025 Vanashakti Judgment on Ex Post Facto Environmental Clearances?

• Need for a Larger Bench Review: The CJI held that the Vanashakti ruling was per incuriam (through lack of care) because it overlooked earlier coordinate-bench judgments such as D. Swamy (2021), which allowed post-facto ECs in exceptional cases, and Alembic Pharmaceuticals (2020), where the SC discouraged such ECs but still regularised them with monetary penalties. 
  • Because of this conflict, the issue must be reconsidered by a larger Bench.
• Principle of Proportionality: The court noted that strict prior-approval enforcement should not lead to outcomes that harm public interest.
  • Heavy penalties and compliance mechanisms already exist to deter violations without requiring demolition.
• Practical Realities of Development: Many projects began without EC due to procedural delays, not deliberate evasion. 
  • Retrospective ECs, used only in rare cases, help bring ongoing projects into compliance without unnecessary reconstruction. The Court made it clear they are exceptional, not routine, and must come with strict penalties.

What is Environmental Clearance (EC) in India?

• About:  EC is a mandatory approval process for certain development and industrial projects in India to ensure that they do not harm the environment or local communities. 
  • It is a legal requirement under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, and is governed primarily by the EIA Notifications of 1994 and 2006.
• Projects That Need EC: Any project located in ecologically sensitive areas (e.g., national parks, biosphere reserves, mangroves, tribal areas, coastal zones) requires EC regardless of category.
  • EIA 2006 mandates prior EC for over 39 types of activities and classifies projects into Category A (cleared by MoEFCC at the Central level) and Category B (cleared by State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) at State level).
• Core Steps: The process begins with an EIA study where required, followed by a public hearing to capture community concerns. 
  • Expert committees then appraise the project through reports and site checks before recommending approval or rejection. 
  • The final decision is issued within 120 days and the clearance is valid for five years.
• Concerns and Limitations: Public consultation often becomes a procedural formality rather than meaningful participation.
  • The EIA process sometimes fails to account for issues raised by local communities.
  • Recent provisions allow skipping public hearings in “non-conducive situations,” potentially weakening checks and balances.

How can India Effectively Balance Environmental Protection with Developmental Needs?

• Strengthen Prior EC Compliance: Enforce rigorous EIAs, public hearings and scientific appraisal before approvals.
• Use Technology for Monitoring: Strengthen deployment of satellite monitoring and digital platforms like PARIVESH, and National Geographical Information System (GIS)-based Violations Portal to track projects and prevent illegal construction.
• Apply Polluter-Pays + Restoration Measures: Impose strict penalties and mandate ecological restoration using mechanisms like Compensatory Afforestation Fund (CAMPA), Environmental Compensation (EC) under National Green Tribunal (NGT) guidelines, and Polluter Pays Principle.
• Promote Green Infrastructure: Expand sustainable infrastructure through schemes like Smart Cities Mission, National Solar Mission, and push for low-carbon mobility.
• Empower Local Communities: Strengthen public participation via Gram Sabhas, Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006 consultations, and improved transparency through public hearing reforms in the EC process.

Conclusion

The recall of the Vanashakti judgment shows the need for a balanced approach that enforces compliance without derailing vital public projects. Going forward, transparent EC processes, strict penalties, and community participation will be key to achieving truly sustainable development.