The Decline of Environmental Jurisprudence and Dilution of Ecological Protection in India
This article critiques the weakening of India's environmental laws and judicial oversight. It highlights recent Supreme Court judgments, such as Vanashakti vs Union of India (2025), which allegedly diluted retrospective environmental clearances. The author discusses the ecological significance of the Aravalli hills and the impact of infrastructure projects like the Char Dham highway on the Himalayas. The piece argues that the 'balancing act' between development and conservation often favors corporate interests, undermining Article 48A and Article 51A(g) of the Constitution, which mandate environmental protection.
Key Points
- Recent judicial trends show a shift toward diluting ecological protection in favor of industrial and infrastructure development.
- The Aravalli hills serve as a vital ecological backbone for north-western India, aiding groundwater recharge and preventing desertification.
- The 'precautionary principle' and 'public trust doctrine' are being sidelined by lenient interpretations of environmental impact assessments.
- Large-scale infrastructure projects in sensitive zones like the Himalayas and mangroves are causing irreversible ecological damage.
Exam Facts
- Article 48A (Directive Principles) and Article 51A(g) (Fundamental Duties) relate to environmental protection.
- M.C. Mehta vs Union of India (2004) and Common Cause vs Union of India (2017) are landmark environmental cases.
- Approximately 34,000 mangrove trees were authorized for felling for infrastructure projects.
Read it. Retain it. Recall it.
Get spaced-repetition flashcards, daily quizzes and offline access — free on Android.