The Supreme Court of India delivered a stern reprimand to Congress Member of Parliament Jairam Ramesh on Thursday, following his challenge to an Office Memorandum issued by the Central Government. This memorandum was designed to implement the Supreme Court’s decision regarding retrospective environmental clearance.
During the proceedings, a bench consisting of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi emphasized that Ramesh’s challenge was effectively aimed at the Supreme Court’s judgement itself, stating, “Can one challenge a judgment by a writ petition? It is just for media consumption.” The court further asserted, “Be ready for exemplary costs. We know the design behind this.”
Jairam Ramesh Withdraws Plea After Court’s Warning
In light of the Supreme Court’s warning regarding potential exemplary costs, Ramesh chose to withdraw his petition. This recent legal encounter follows a significant ruling by the Supreme Court in May 2025, which affirmed that the right to live in a pollution-free environment is a fundamental right. At that time, the court had invalidated a prior Office Memorandum from the Central Government that allowed for ex post facto environmental clearances, which essentially retroactively approved projects that violated environmental regulations.
Supreme Court’s Stance on Environmental Protection
The court underscored the constitutional duty of both the Union government and individual citizens to safeguard the environment. It voiced strong disapproval of the government’s attempts to allow actions that contravene established laws, asserting that it “must come down very heavily” on these actions.
Furthermore, the court pointed out the deceptive nature of the 2021 memorandum. It indicated that while explicit terms for ex post facto clearances were not used, the memorandum contained provisions that effectively sanctioned such approvals. The Supreme Court subsequently ordered the Central Government to refrain from issuing directives for granting any form of ex post facto clearances, or from regularizing actions conducted in violation of the Environmental Impact Assessment notification.
Impact of the Supreme Court Ruling
This ruling is significant as it reinforces the judiciary’s commitment to environmental protection and highlights the importance of adhering to legal and regulatory frameworks regarding environmental clearances. The Supreme Court’s remarks and the decisions made during the hearing underline the judiciary’s role in ensuring that government actions align with constitutional mandates regarding environmental rights.
Ramesh’s withdrawal of his challenge is seen as a recognition of the court’s position, and it reiterates the serious implications of attempting to contest a binding judicial decision through alternative legal avenues. The fallout from this case could have lasting effects on how environmental policies are interpreted and implemented in the future.