Supreme Court's Crucial Verdict: Environmental Compliance versus Project Demolition

The Supreme Court has held back its decision on a spate of petitions challenging its landmark May 16 ruling, which annulled the Centre's decision to grant retrospective environmental clearances to non-compliant projects. These petitions argue the necessity of revising the verdict to consider legal frameworks and precedents that the initial judgment allegedly overlooked.

Justice A S Oka's previous judgment, now under scrutiny, emphasized the fundamental right to a pollution-free environment, revoking clearances to several firms. Advocates representing industrial entities argue that this decision ignored the balance between compliance and the overarching public interest, especially regarding the legality of projects like AIIMS hospitals.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and other senior counsels argue that retroactive clearances were in line with established legal practices and national interests. They appealed for a more holistic view, weighing environmental non-compliance against potential benefits from infrastructural developments. As the Court deliberates, the fate of numerous projects hangs in the balance.

(With inputs from agencies.)