Summary
The NGT had held that the General Conditions of the EIA Notification, 2006 apply to building, construction, township and area development projects (Items 8(a) and 8(b)), so that such projects within 5 km of protected, critically or severely polluted, eco-sensitive areas or inter-State boundaries must be appraised centrally as Category A. Since a coordinate Bench in Vanashakti v. Union of India had meanwhile upheld the 2025 notification declaring that the General Conditions do not apply to Item 8 (save Note 1 to Item 8(a)), the Supreme Court agreed with that view and held that the NGT order no longer survived.
Issues
- Whether the General Conditions under the EIA Notification, 2006 apply to Item 8(a) (building and construction projects) and Item 8(b) (township and area development projects) of its Schedule.
- Whether such projects located near protected areas, critically or severely polluted areas, eco-sensitive areas or inter-State boundaries must be treated as Category A and appraised by the Central Expert Appraisal Committee instead of State authorities.
- What effect the decision in Vanashakti v. Union of India, upholding the notification dated 29.01.2025, has on the NGT order under appeal.
Provisions considered
- Schedule, Items 8(a) and 8(b), Column 5 and General Conditions, Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 - EIA Notification S.O. 1533(E) dated 14.09.2006Following Vanashakti, read literally: Column 5 expressly applies the General Conditions wherever intended, and it never did so for Items 8(a) and 8(b), so the General Conditions were never attracted to those projects. (¶¶ 13, 22, 24, 24.1)
- Item 8, Column 5, Notes 1 and 2, Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 - Notification S.O. 523(E) dated 29.01.2025The notification stating that General Conditions shall not apply was upheld in Vanashakti, except Note 1 to Item 8(a) exempting industrial sheds, schools, colleges and educational hostels, which was quashed; the notification as so upheld was held to govern the field. (¶¶ 21, 22, 23, 24.3, 25)
- Section 22, National Green Tribunal Act, 2010The appellants, though not parties before the NGT, invoked the statutory appeal as they were directly and substantially affected by the order. (¶¶ 2, 4)
Held
- As the coordinate Bench in Vanashakti v. Union of India had already adjudicated the issues raised, by upholding the 2025 notification and the Office Memorandum of 30.01.2025 save for Note 1 to Item 8(a), judicial propriety required the appeals to be disposed of in light of that decision rather than re-examining the issues afresh. (¶ 23)
- The Court agreed with Vanashakti that, on a literal reading of the EIA Notification, 2006, the General Conditions were never applicable to Items 8(a) and 8(b), and that the NGT failed to construe the 2006 notification in its correct perspective. (¶¶ 24, 24.1, 25)
- The Court endorsed the view that environmental protection must be balanced with sustainable development and that the SEIAA, an expert body constituted by the Central Government, is suited to appraise projects in each State or Union Territory. (¶¶ 24.2, 25)
- The NGT order dated 09.08.2024 does not survive; the 2025 notification, excluding Note 1 to Item 8(a), holds the field. (¶ 25)
Result
Appeals disposed of; the NGT order dated 09.08.2024 held not to survive in view of Vanashakti, with the notification dated 29.01.2025 (excluding Note 1 to Entry 8(a)) holding the field; no order as to costs.