New Delhi: The Congress on Tuesday termed as “doubly disappointing” the Supreme Court recalling its judgement that prohibited post-facto environmental clearances to projects, and said retrospective approvals with penalties howsoever heavy is no solution as it only regularises the by-passing of laws.
The Supreme Court, by a 2:1 majority, on Tuesday recalled its May 16 judgement that had prohibited the Centre from granting retrospective environmental clearances (ECs) to projects found violating environmental norms.
A bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and justices Ujjal Bhuyan and K Vinod Chandran delivered three separate verdicts on a batch of nearly 40 review and modification pleas filed against the Vanshakti judgement.
Reacting to the development, Congress general secretary in-charge communications Jairam Ramesh said it is most disappointing that the outgoing Chief Justice of India has opened a door for a review of the May 16 judgement of the two-judge bench of the Supreme Court that had barred retrospective environmental approvals.
“Retrospective environmental clearances are sought deliberately by companies who are well aware of the laws but still violate them knowingly with a ‘baadme dekha jayega’ attitude. There are numerous examples of this approach, the former environment minister said.
Retrospective approvals are bad in law and make a mockery of governance, he said.
“This decision of the Chief Justice is doubly disappointing since just yesterday he had directed the Uttarakhand government to restore and repair ecological damage at the Corbett Tiger Reserve caused by illegal tree felling and unauthorised construction. In addition, last week he had issued an order banning all mining activity within a kilometre of any national park or wildlife sanctuary,” Ramesh said.
The CJI had also put on hold the Rajasthan government’s proposal to redraw the boundaries of the Sariska Tiger Reserve and had directed the Jharkhand government to declare two rich forest areas as wildlife sanctuaries after fulfilling the provisions of the Forest Rights Act, 2006, he said.
“Retrospective approvals with penalties howsoever heavy is no solution. It only regularises the by-passing of laws,” Ramesh said.
The May 16 verdict by a bench of Justice A S Oka, since retired, and Justice Bhuyan had barred the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) and the authorities concerned from granting retrospective environmental clearances (ECs) to projects which are found in violation of environmental norms.
CJI Gavai and Justice Chandran recalled the May 16 verdict and placed the matter before an appropriate bench for reconsideration of the issues afresh.
“Public projects of Rs 20,000 crore will have to be demolished if the clearance is not reviewed. In my judgment, I have allowed the recall. My judgement has been criticised by my brother..Justice Bhuyan,” the CJI said.
Justice Bhuyan delivered a strong dissent, holding that retrospective clearances are unknown to environmental law.
He maintained that “there is no concept of ex-post facto environmental clearance in environmental law,” describing the very idea as “an anathema, a curse devoted to evil, to environmental jurisprudence”.
The CJI said the court had “found that in the 2013 notification as well as the 2021 Office Memorandum, the scheme was to permit grant of environmental clearance on the imposition of heavy penalties”.
