In a recent landmark decision, the Supreme Court of India has struck down a contentious clause of a notification issued during the COVID-19 pandemic. This clause, which waived the need for prior environmental clearances for certain "linear projects" such as roads and pipelines, came under scrutiny for its hasty implementation and lack of public consultation.

The bench, comprising Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, criticized the Central government for the undue haste with which the notification was issued in March 2020, just two days after the nationwide lockdown was imposed. 

The Court questioned the necessity of such haste when the activities of linear projects had already halted due to the lockdown.

Central to the Court's decision was the violation of Environment Protection Rules in issuing the notification. The Court highlighted the absence of recorded satisfaction by competent authorities regarding the need or public interest for such a significant alteration in environmental clearance procedures.

Moreover, the Court emphasized the importance of public participation in environmental matters, citing Article 21 of the Constitution which guarantees the right to live in a pollution-free environment. It underscored the duty of citizens to protect and improve the environment, necessitating their involvement in decision-making processes through objections and public consultations.

The notification in question, issued in March 2020, had amended the original 2006 notification requiring environmental clearances for activities impacting the environment. The contentious clause exempted the extraction of ordinary earth for linear projects from such clearances.

The Court found this exemption arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution due to its lack of definition for "linear projects" and absence of specified excavation processes. The blanket exemption, without adequate safeguards, was deemed arbitrary and unacceptable.

Consequently, the Supreme Court partly allowed the appeal against the National Green Tribunal's decision and struck down the controversial clause in both the March 2020 and August 2023 notifications.

The decision marks a significant step towards upholding environmental protections and ensuring transparency and public participation in decision-making processes. It serves as a reminder of the importance of adhering to established legal procedures, especially in matters concerning environmental conservation and public welfare.

The appellant was represented by Senior Advocate Anitha Shenoy and advocates, while the Central government was represented by Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, Senior Advocate Swarupama Chaturvedi.

Case: Noble M Paikada vs. Union of India,

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 1628-1629 OF 2021.

Click here to read/download judgment.