In a major legal ruling, the Supreme Court of India struck down a 2021 executive memorandum that permitted routine ex post facto environmental clearances for industrial projects. The court reinforced that development projects must secure prior environmental approvals before beginning execution to ensure regulatory compliance. This decision reinstates strict environmental oversight and ensures that industrial expansion cannot bypass critical ecological impact assessments. Quashing of the 2021 Administrative MemorandumIn a major legal landmark for environmental jurisprudence, a three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court of India delivered a landmark verdict in Vanashakti v. Union of India (Vanashakti III), quashing the Central Government’s July 2021 Office Memorandum that permitted ex post facto environmental clearances (ECs) for industrial and infrastructure projects. Led by Chief Justice Surya Kant alongside Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V.M. Pancholi, the Court ruled that administrative instruments cannot create a perpetual, routine mechanism to regularize illegal construction or industrial operations commenced without mandatory prior clearance. Reaffirming the core principles of the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification, 2006, the Bench declared that prior environmental clearance remains the non-negotiable rule, and attempting to grant retrospective regularizations via executive memoranda violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. Application of Eco-Centric Proportionality and Precautionary PrinciplesAuthoring the majority opinion, Justice Joymalya Bagchi emphasized that environmental assessment stages—including screening, scoping, public consultation, and expert appraisal—are designed to operate strictly before ground construction begins to evaluate ecological risks before damage becomes irreversible. Adopting an approach termed "eco-centric proportionality," the Court rejected arguments that paying monetary penalties or environmental compensation under civil laws could automatically substitute for missing environmental impact assessments. The justices clarified that projects built without prior clearance generate no legal equity in favor of project developers, and unapproved commercial sites remain subject to status quo ante enforcement, including potential closure, demolition, and mandatory site remediation. Narrow Statutory Exceptions and Prospective ReliefWhile striking down the perpetual administrative mechanism created under the 2021 Memorandum, the Supreme Court clarified the limits of executive and legislative powers under Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. The Bench held that while executive notes cannot bypass statutory notifications, the Central Government retains narrow statutory powers to frame time-bound, strictly defined emergency windows for ex post facto reviews—provided they are backed by supervening public interest, stringent ecological damage assessments, and un-capped financial compensation models. Exercising its prospective overruling powers to prevent severe economic disruption, the Court spared vital public infrastructure projects—including a 962-bed AIIMS hospital in Odisha and a greenfield airport in Karnataka—from immediate demolition, subjecting them instead to rigorous environmental remediation penalties and site assessments.