Supreme Court Reprimands Congress MP Jairam Ramesh Over Environmental Clearance Challenge
In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India on Thursday strongly reprimanded Congress Member of Parliament Jairam Ramesh for filing a petition challenging an Office Memorandum issued by the Central government. This memorandum was designed to implement the apex court's own judgment regarding retrospective environmental clearances for projects.
Bench Criticizes Petition as Media Stunt
A bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, which also included Justice Joymalya Bagchi, expressed severe disapproval of the plea. The justices emphasized that since the Office Memorandum was intended solely to execute a Supreme Court judgment, any challenge to it effectively amounted to a challenge against the judgment itself. The bench explicitly stated, "Be ready for exemplary costs. We know the design behind this," highlighting their skepticism about the motives behind the petition.
Further, the bench questioned the legal validity of such a move, remarking, "Can one challenge a judgment by a writ petition? It is just for media consumption." Faced with the court's stern warning about imposing substantial penalties, Jairam Ramesh promptly withdrew his plea, avoiding potential financial repercussions.
Background of the Environmental Clearance Judgment
This incident traces back to a landmark ruling by the Supreme Court in May of last year. In that judgment, the court affirmed that the right to live in a pollution-free atmosphere is an integral part of fundamental rights under the Constitution. Consequently, it struck down a Centre's Office Memorandum that had permitted ex post facto or retrospective environmental clearances for projects that had violated established norms.
The court firmly declared, "The Union government, as much as individual citizens, has a constitutional obligation to protect the environment." It added that it "must come down very heavily" on any attempts by the Centre to engage in actions "completely prohibited under the law." The bench also observed that the 2021 Office Memorandum, while not explicitly using the term "ex post facto," effectively provided for granting such clearances, thereby violating previous court decisions.
Implications and Restraints on the Centre
As a direct result of last year's judgment, the Central government was restrained from issuing any directions that could lead to the grant of ex post facto environmental clearances in any form or manner. This prohibition also extended to regularizing any acts done in contravention of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) notification, reinforcing the court's commitment to stringent environmental protection standards.
The Supreme Court's recent admonishment of Jairam Ramesh underscores its unwavering stance on upholding judicial authority and preventing what it perceives as frivolous litigation aimed at garnering media attention. This episode highlights the ongoing tensions between political figures and judicial mandates in matters of environmental governance and legal compliance.
