The Supreme Court on Thursday was requested to reconstitute a three-judge bench to rehear pleas challenging the grant of retrospective environmental clearances to projects that violated environmental norms. This follows a split in judicial opinion, with a majority verdict from November 2025 reviving a controversial government policy permitting such clearances upon payment of penalties.
The Supreme Court was urged on Thursday to set up a fresh three-judge bench to reconsider petitions challenging the retrospective grant of environmental clearances (ECs) to projects found in violation of environmental norms.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was apprised by a lawyer that a new bench needs to be constituted to hear the matter afresh. “We will see,” CJI Kant responded.
The request stems from a prior ruling delivered on November 18, 2025, by a bench headed by then Chief Justice B.R. Gavai, which—by a 2:1 majority—allowed the Centre and statutory authorities to regularize environmental violations through retrospective ECs, provided that violators pay heavy penalties. The bench reasoned that otherwise “thousands of crores of rupees would go in waste.”
This ruling reversed an earlier order dated May 16, 2025, where a bench comprising Justices A.S. Oka (since retired) and Ujjal Bhuyan had categorically barred the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) from granting post-facto environmental clearances to projects that had proceeded without prior approvals.
Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, who was part of the May 16 decision, dissented from the majority in the Gavai-led bench, stating that retrospective ECs are “anathema to environmental law” and contrary to both the precautionary principle and the need for sustainable development.
The majority opinion by CJI Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran effectively revived the controversial 2017 notification and 2021 Office Memorandum issued by the MoEFCC. These instruments had laid down procedures for regularising operations of projects that had started construction without prior ECs, subject to the imposition of penalties.
The court had also directed that the matter, including the petition filed by environmental NGO Vanshakti, be placed before the Chief Justice on the administrative side to constitute a bench for a fresh hearing.
The future of retrospective environmental clearances—seen by critics as a regulatory backdoor for violators—will now hinge on whether a reconstituted bench reconsiders the legal permissibility and environmental implications of such policies.
