Supreme Court strikes down exemption from environmental clearance norms for educational, industrial buildings

The Supreme Court on Friday struck down the exemption granted to industrial sheds, schools, colleges, hostels, and other educational institutions from the requirement of obtaining prior environmental clearance under the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification, 2006 [Vanashakti vs Union of India].

A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran struck down note 1 to clause 8(a) of the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change’s (MoEFCC) notification dated January 29, 2025.

The Court upheld the rest of the notification but ruled that the specific exemption was arbitrary and liable to be set aside.

The judgment was passed on a petition filed by Vanashakti which approached the Court challenging both the January 29 notification and a subsequent office memorandum dated January 30.

The petitioner contended that the exemption to industrial and educational buildings up to 1,50,000 square meters from the EIA regime, diluted the 2006 framework without scientific basis or reason.

It also argued that no rationale had been provided for the removal of the “general conditions” clause which ensured additional safeguards for eco-sensitive and pollution-affected areas.

The plea raised concerns over large-scale construction projects escaping mandatory environmental checks, particularly in areas near wildlife sanctuaries, inter-state boundaries and critically polluted zones. It also cited previous expert reports and government committee recommendations against such dilution of norms.

The Supreme Court accepted the challenge in part, holding that the exclusion of such projects from the EIA process was not in line with the object and purpose of the Environmental Protection Act, 1986.

“If any construction activity in an area more than 20,000 sq ft is carried out it will naturally have an effect on the environment even if the building is for educational purpose,” the Court said. It noted that there was “no mechanism like impact assessment to be done by an expert body like SEIAA” in the exempted categories and added, “We see no reason to discriminate the other buildings with the buildings constructed for industrial or educational purposes,” the Court said.

The Court noted that the exemption granted was without sufficient justification. It observed that the MoEFCC had only issued guidelines for adherence to environmental aspects but had not provided for expert-led evaluation.

“We see no reason behind the exemption of 2006 notification for the industry and educational buildings,” the bench said, adding that the nature of construction activity, and not the end-use, was relevant to environmental scrutiny.

The Court clarified that the remaining parts of the notification, including the revised framework for environmental clearance processing through State Environment Impact Assessment Authorities (SEIAAs), were valid.

“We see no reason why [SEIAA] should not be permitted to consider the proposals pertaining to the projects in their respective States if it is a properly constituted body in accordance with the statute,” the order stated.

While disposing of the petition, the Court held:

“While upholding the impugned notification dated 29th January 2025 we hold that the Note 1 to clause 8(a) is arbitrary and therefore is liable to be set aside. The petition is partially allowed. The impugned notification is upheld except Note 1 to clause 8(a), which is set aside.”

The January 30 2025 Office Memorandum issued by the MoEFCC, which sought to expand the meaning of “industrial sheds” and “educational institutions” to include warehouses, private training academies and professional institutes, was also challenged in the petition. However, the Court did not make specific observations on this memorandum while pronouncing its order.

[Read Live Coverage]