Vanashakti v. Union of India
Background
These connected petitions challenged a 2017 government notification and a 2021 Office Memorandum that allowed industries, real-estate projects and other developments which had started construction or operations without obtaining a mandatory prior Environmental Clearance (EC) to apply for clearance retroactively: commonly called "ex post facto" EC. The Madras High Court had earlier quashed the 2021 Office Memorandum but limited its ruling to apply only prospectively, which was also under challenge before the Supreme Court.
Decision Breakdown
The Court traced the history of India's environmental clearance framework under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, and reaffirmed its own prior rulings that the very concept of a retrospective or "ex post facto" environmental clearance is fundamentally alien to environmental jurisprudence, since environmental damage from unauthorised construction cannot be undone after the fact. It held both the 2017 notification and the 2021 Office Memorandum to be illegal and arbitrary, in violation of the right to a pollution-free environment under Article 21, and struck them down. The Court permanently restrained the Central Government from issuing any future scheme permitting ex post facto clearances, while clarifying that clearances already granted under the now-struck-down measures would not be disturbed.
Lesson Learnt
Environmental clearance must always come before construction or industrial activity begins, never after: no government notification or policy can legally forgive violations of this rule retroactively, because environmental protection is treated as a non-negotiable, precautionary safeguard rather than something that can be regularised once the damage is already done.