More Stories

Informist, Thursday, Feb. 12, 2026

 

NEW DELHI – The Supreme Court Thursday refused to entertain Congress leader Jairam Ramesh's writ petition challenging the legality of the Centre's notification and office memorandum granting retrospective environmental clearance to mining and other development projects. The bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said that he knew the "design" behind these kinds of petitions. "Why did you not file a review? You are just raising all these grounds in a writ petition. In a writ petition, how can you seek review of a judgment," said Justice Kant, adding that it was filed only for media coverage and Ramesh should be ready to pay exemplary cost.

 

The top court said Ramesh's petition was not maintainable as he cannot file a writ petition against the court's larger bench judgment. Observing that Ramesh had indirectly filed a review petition, the court asked him to avail other remedies in law. 

 

Allowing review petitions by Steel Authority of India Ltd., Confederation of Real Estate Developers of India, and industry, the Supreme Court on Nov. 18 recalled its May 2025 verdict that had restrained the Centre from granting retrospective environmental clearance to mining and other development projects. In a two-to-one majority judgment, a bench led by then chief justice of India B.R. Gavai had said public projects of INR 200 billion would have to be demolished if its May order was not recalled.

 

Last month, Ramesh moved the apex court and said that retrospective environmental approval was bad in law, detrimentalal to public health and made a mockery of governance. This gives an easy way out to those who are actually wilful defaulters, said Ramesh, adding that ignorance of the law cannot be an excuse for violating it. 

 

In May 2025, the apex court had quashed a 2017 notification and a 2021 office memorandum that allowed for retrospective environmental clearance to projects that were in violation of the Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006. According to the 2006 notification, mining and other development projects needed a prior environmental clearance from the regulatory authority concerned to start a project. These notifications of 2017 and the office memorandum of 2021 had allowed projects that had started work or completed it in defiance of the 2006 notification to get a retrospective environmental clearance.

 

In May, the apex court had said that the 2017 notification and 2021 office memorandum sought to protect violators who had acted with full knowledge of consequences of violating the 2006 notification. Those who violated the law regarding obtaining prior environmental clearance were not only committing gross illegality, but were acting against the society at large, the court had said. The violation of the condition of obtaining prior environmental clearance must be dealt with a heavy hand, it had said. 

 

In May, the apex court was hearing a petition by non-government organisation Vanashakti, which had challenged the 2017 notification and 2021 office memorandum on the grounds that these were arbitrary, illegal and ultra vires the provisions of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.  End  

 

Reported by Surya Tripathi

Edited by Tanima Banerjee

 

For users of real-time market data terminals, Informist news is available exclusively on the NSE Cogencis WorkStation.

 

Cogencis news is now Informist news. This follows the acquisition of Cogencis Information Services Ltd. by NSE Data & Analytics Ltd., a 100% subsidiary of the National Stock Exchange of India Ltd. As a part of the transaction, the news department of Cogencis has been sold to Informist Media Pvt. Ltd.

 

Informist Media Tel +91 (22) 6985-4000

Send comments to feedback@informistmedia.com

 

© Informist Media Pvt. Ltd. 2026. All rights reserved.