The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday reserved its judgment on a critical batch of petitions and review pleas concerning the grant of retrospective—or ex post facto—environmental clearance (EC) to projects that have already commenced operations in violation of green norms.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi concluded the hearing after considering arguments from a battery of senior advocates and Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, who represented the Union Government.
At the heart of the legal battle is whether the government can legally “regularize” projects that began construction or operations without obtaining the mandatory prior environmental approvals.
The current proceedings are a fresh hearing of a batch of pleas, including review petitions, challenging a landmark May 16, 2025, ruling in the Vanashakti case. That 2025 verdict had initially barred the Centre from granting retrospective clearances, effectively mandating that projects without prior approval be treated as illegal.
The trajectory of this case has seen significant shifts. Following the 2025 ruling, the order was stayed to prevent what was described as a potential waste of “thousands of crores in public investment.”
On November 18 last year, a three-judge bench led by the then Chief Justice of India, B.R. Gavai, delivered a 2:1 majority interim order that reversed the 2025 verdict. The majority then held that preventing retrospective clearances would lead to the demolition of numerous vital public projects built with nearly ₹20,000 crore from the public exchequer.
The bench at that time noted that such a loss to the public purse would be “wasteful,” leading to the decision to pave the way for regularizing those violating projects subject to fresh hearings.
The Centre, through ASG Aishwarya Bhati, has advocated for the viability of ex post facto clearances under specific regulatory frameworks to ensure that essential infrastructure is not destroyed. Conversely, petitioners argue that allowing retrospective clearances undermines the “precautionary principle” of environmental law, as it allows developers to present a fait accompli to the authorities.
With the arguments now concluded, the bench’s upcoming verdict will determine the final legal standing of thousands of crores worth of infrastructure projects and the future of environmental compliance enforcement in India.
