11th Feb, 2025: The National Alliance for Climate and Ecological Justice (NACEJ), a pan-India initiative of the National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM) to address the climate crisis through an ecological and social justice approach, has submitted strong objections to the recent notifications issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEF & CC) that prioritizes the ‘ease of doing business’ over critical environmental protection, public health and the rights of people and communities.
Through notifications G.S.R 702(E) and G.S.R 703(E) issued on 12th November 2024, the MoEF &CC exempted requirements of Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate as per the mandate of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974 and Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981 for:
● All industries having obtained an Environmental Clearance and
● 39 Industries, which are now classified as “White industries”
Such arbitrary notifications have far-reaching ramifications. NACEJ is of the view that MoEF & CC is:
1. Violating its own mandate when it considers the ‘ease of doing business’ more important than the long-term consequences for the environment and human health;
2. Undermining India’s commitments to reduce emissions intensity and meet its climate targets given to the UNFCCC.
3. Enabling arbitrary and unscientific exemptions, without proper assessment. Some of these industries like Fly Ash Brick manufacturing have well-documented adverse environmental and health impacts.
4. Overreaching its executive function by effectively amending the fundamental provisions of the Water Act and Air Act, and also violating federal principles.
5. Disregarding the requirements of the Pre-Legislative Consultation Policy (2014) of the Govt of India that mandate prior public consultation.
Having thoroughly analyzed these notifications, NACEJ submitted the following objections:
1. Weakening Environmental Safeguards: The lifting of consent requirements for industries with environmental clearances directly contradicts the foundational objectives of the Air Act and Water Act, which were enacted to protect public health and ensure environmental safety and sustainability.
2. Neglect of Monitoring and Compliance Mechanisms: The drastic reduction in the requirements for the renewal of Consents to Operate and Consent to Establish eliminates the only routine check on industrial compliance.
3. Pollution from ‘white industries’: It is misleading and dangerous to categorize certain industries as “White Industries”. “Fly ash, a byproduct of coal combustion, contains toxic heavy metals such as arsenic, lead, and mercury. Improper handling and disposal of fly ash can result in severe air, water, and soil contamination, posing health hazards to local communities, both directly and through water and food chains.
4. Unauthorized Amendments to Fundamental Environmental Laws: The provisions under Section 25(1) of both the Water Act and the Air Act do not provide for industries to be blanketly exempt from obtaining Consent to Establish or Operate. The Ministry’s notifications represent a substantive amendment to these Acts, which can only be enacted through a formal legislative process.
5. Lack of Pre-consultation: The failure to follow due process, including pre-consultations with affected communities, experts, and civil society organizations, not only violates democratic norms but also bypasses the Pre-Legislative Consultation Policy (2014) of the Govt of India, critical for public input into policymaking.
In light of these objections, NACEJ demands:
● IMMEDIATE WITHDRAWAL of the Notifications G.S.R 702(E) and G.S.R 703(E) dated 12th November 2024 that seek to exempt industries from Consent to Operate and Consent to Establish requirements.
● DETAILED AND INDEPENDENT STUDY on the potential environmental, social, and economic impacts of exempting the 39 industries from obtaining Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate. This study should be made publicly available and subject to public scrutiny.
● UPHOLD THE ROLE OF SPCBs and their continued statutory responsibility to monitor industrial compliance with environmental standards, particularly in light of the weakening of consent requirements.
NACEJ members across India who are grassroots movement activists, ecologists, climate scientists, environmental researchers and lawyers hope that the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change will roll back these Notifications and prioritize safeguarding India’s environmental and public health, instead of diluting the enviro-legal regime, to facilitate ‘ease of doing business’, that runs contrary to interests of larger sections of people and the ecology.
Full Text of the Letter
To,
Shri Ved Prakash Mishra,
Joint Secretary,
Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change,
New Delhi
Sub: Objections to Exemptions to Industries from Obtaining Consent to Establish and Exemptions Given to 39 Industries from Requirements of Consent to Operate and Consent to Establish – Seeking withdrawal – Reg
Sir,
We the undersigned are writing to you on behalf of the National Alliance for Climate and Ecological Justice (NACEJ); a pan-Indian initiative of the National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM) to address Climate Crisis, through an Ecological and Social Justice Approach, upholding human rights and co-existence of all species.
We would like to submit our strong objections to the recent notifications issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEF & CC) that clearly prioritize the ‘ease of doing business’ over critical environmental protection, public health and the rights of people and communities.
Through notifications [G.S.R 702(E) and G.S.R 703(E)] issued on 12th November, 2024, [Annex-1 & 2] MoEF&CC exempted requirements of Consent to Establish (CTE) and Consent to Operate (CTO) as per the requirements of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974 and Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981 for:
- All industries having obtained an Environmental Clearance and
- 39 industries, which are now classified as “White industries”
In doing so, the MoEFCC has diluted Section 25(1) of the environmental laws- Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981 for industries’ ease of doing business at the cost of environmental protection and health of citizens.
Part-A: The current course of action raises profound legal, environmental, and social concerns. We would specifically like to raise the following objections:
1. Weakening Environmental Safeguards:
The lifting of consent requirements for industries with environmental clearances is a direct contradiction to the foundational objectives of the Air Act and Water Act, which were enacted to protect public health and ensure environmental safety and sustainability. These consents issued by the State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) provide appropriate conditions for local environmental challenges, which cannot be effectively addressed solely through broad, standardized environmental clearance conditions. Removing these safeguards weakens critical pollution control measures.
2. Neglect of Monitoring and Compliance Mechanisms:
The role of the SPCBs in monitoring compliance with consent conditions is central to maintaining industrial accountability. The Regional Offices of MoEF & CC, while responsible for monitoring environmental clearance conditions, are under-resourced and ill-equipped to perform the same level of oversight as the SPCBs. The drastic reduction in the requirements for the renewal of Consents to Operate and Consent to Establish eliminates the only routine check on industrial compliance. This exemption risks the creation of a regulatory vacuum, where industries may operate with minimal oversight, undermining the effectiveness of environmental governance.
3. Pollution from “White Industries”:
It is misleading and dangerous to categorize certain industries, such as Fly Ash Bricks/Block Manufacturing, as “White Industries” and grant them complete exemptions from environmental oversight. Fly ash, a byproduct of coal combustion, is known to contain toxic heavy metals such as arsenic, lead, and mercury. Improper handling and disposal of fly ash can result in severe air and water contamination, posing health hazards to local communities. These industries, despite their classification, are still known to contribute to local air and water pollution. The complete exemption from obtaining consents and subsequent monitoring by Pollution Control Boards further undermines the integrity and efficacy of the regulatory framework.
4. Unauthorized Amendments to Fundamental Environmental Laws:
The provisions under Section 25(1) of both the Water Act and the Air Act do not provide for the blanket exemption of industries from obtaining Consents to Establish or Operate. The Ministry’s notifications represent a substantive amendment of these Acts, which can only be enacted through a formal legislative process. The issuance of these notifications bypasses the required constitutional and legal procedures, thus rendering them potentially ultra vires and open to judicial scrutiny. By weakening the mandate of SPCBs, the Notifications are also clearly in violation of the principles of federalism, laid down in the Constitution.
5. Lack of Consultation and Public Engagement:
The drastic nature of these changes, which directly impact national environmental policy and the public’s right to a clean and healthy environment, was made without any public consultation or transparent engagement with all those who would be potentially impacted by such decision-making. The failure to follow due process, including consultations with affected communities, experts, and civil society organizations, not only violates democratic norms but also bypasses critical public input into policymaking.
The manner in which these notifications have been issued also goes against the requirements of the PLCP – Pre-Legislative Consultation Policy (2014) of the Govt of India, which must be followed by all Ministries (including MoEF & CC), before introducing Bills and subordinate legislations. The said Policy requires every Department/Ministry to proactively place the proposed legislations / rules in the public domain, widely publicize the same, indicate the financial implications as well as impacts of such legislation on the environment, fundamental rights, lives and livelihoods of the concerned/affected people, and provide at least 30 days window for public feedback. [Annex-3]
Part-B: In the light of such arbitrary notifications, which would have far-reaching ramifications, we are of the firm view that:
1. MoEF is prioritizing ‘Ease of Doing Business’ Over Environmental Protection:
The decision to grant blanket exemptions to industries from obtaining Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate, particularly in light of the overriding objectives of the Air Act and Water Act is patently arbitrary and legally questionable. The stated purpose of these Acts is to prevent pollution and protect public health. The Ministry is violating its own mandate when it considers ‘ease of doing business’ far more important than environmental and public health safety, especially when the impacts of industrial pollution are undeniable and have long-term consequences for the environment and human health.
2. Adverse Impact of Reckless ‘Economic Growth’ on Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and the Climate Crisis being Ignored:
The push for increased industrial activity, as facilitated by the exemptions are inconsistent with India’s Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement. While non-GHG air pollutants such as particulate matter, SO₂, and heavy metal particulates do not fall directly under India’s NDC targets, the increased industrial activity resulting from these exemptions will lead to higher greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This undermines India’s commitment to reducing the emission intensity of its GDP (pledge 2 under the NDCs). Through such ‘exemptions’, MoEF& CC is directly exacerbating the intensity of emissions, which would hinder India’s ability to meet its climate targets.
3. Classification of “White Industries” is Unscientific and Arbitrary:
The classification of 39 industries as “White Industries”, thereby exempting them from the environmental clearance & scrutiny requirements is clearly ill-conceived and arbitrary. Given that some of these industries (such as Fly Ash Brick manufacturing) have well-documented adverse environmental impacts, such classification is legally untenable and unscientific. It is also not clear as to how the Ministry plans to assess the cumulative environmental impact of these industries, especially in the context of rapidly deteriorating ecosystems and biodiversity.
4. Impugned Notification is Legally Untenable:
We are of the considered view that the impugned notifications are potentially unlawful and unconstitutional, considering the fact that they amend the fundamental provisions of the Water Act and Air Act and also run contrary to principles of federalism.
Part-C: Demands:
In light of the above submissions and concerns expressed, NACEJ demands the following:
- IMMEDIATE WITHDRAWAL of the notifications G.S.R 702 (E) and G.S.R 703 (E) dt. 12th November, 2024 that seek to exempt industries from requirements of Consent to Operate and Consent to Establish.
- DETAILED STUDY on the potential environmental, social, and economic impacts of exempting the 39 industries from obtaining Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate. This study should be made publicly available and subject to public scrutiny.
- UPHOLD THE ROLE OF SPCBs and their continued statutory responsibility to monitor industrial compliance with environmental standards, particularly in light of the weakening of consent requirements.
- REFRAIN from making any arbitrary, undemocratic and legally unsound executive changes / amendments to the Water Act and Air Act, that seek to dilute the letter and spirit of these important legislations.
We hope that the Ministry will take immediate corrective action in the light of the aforesaid demands and prioritize safeguarding India’s environmental and public health, instead of diluting the enviro-legal regime, to facilitate ‘ease of doing business’, that runs contrary to interests of large sections of people and the ecology.
Thanking you and expecting an acknowledgement of concerns raised in this letter and fair decision.
Signed by members of NACEJ:
- Aashita Dawer, Senior Research Fellow, Climate and Sustainability IDEAS JGU, Sonipat, Haryana
- Abhayraj Naik, Researcher, Bengaluru / Sri City
- Adarsh Shahi, NAPM, Delhi
- Akanksha Sharma, Environmental Researcher, Jharkhand
- Alok Shukla, Chhattisgarh Bachao Andolan, Raipur
- Amitraj Deshmukh, NAPM, Pune
- Anasuya Kale Chhabrani, Social Activist, Save Ajni Vann, Nagpur
- Apekshita Varshney, HeatWatch, Bengaluru
- Apoorv Grover, People for Aravallis, New Delhi
- Ashok Shrimali, Mines Minerals and People, Gujarat
- Bhanu Tatak, Independent Researcher, Arunachal Pradesh
- Daniel Jose, Climate Front India, Kerala
- Disha A Ravi, Fridays for Future India, Bengaluru
- Dr. Suhas Kolhekar, NAPM Maharashtra and Health Rights Activist
- Eric Pinto, Green Brigade, Goa
- Gabriele Dietrich, NAPM Tamil Nadu
- Grijesh Dinker, Advocate, Climate researcher and activist, New Delhi
- Himanshu Thakkar, SANDRP, Delhi
- Himdhara Environment Research and Action Collective, Himachal Pradesh
- Kailash Meena, Prakriti Bachao Andolan, Rajasthan
- Kavin Castro, Advocate, NAJAR Tamil Nadu
- Krithika A Dinesh, National Alliance for Justice, Accountability and Rights, Delhi
- Maanasee Hatkar, Law Student, Sonipat, Haryana
- Malaika Mathew Chawla, Wildlife biologist, Gujarat
- Medha Patkar, Social Activist, Narmada Bachao Andolan and NAPM, Madhya Pradesh
- Meenakshi Kapoor, Lawyer, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh
- Meera Sanghamitra, NAPM Telangana
- Navjeev Digra, Climate Front India, Jammu
- Nayana Udayashankar, Lawyer and Researcher, Karnataka
- Neelam Ahluwalia, People for Aravallis, Haryana
- Nikita, Climate Action Specialist, Telangana
- Prafulla Samantara, Lok Shakti Abhiyan and NAPM Odisha
- Prasad Chacko, Ahmedabad
- Rajesh Ramakrishnan, Campaign to Defend Nature and People, Chennai
- Rajkumar Sinha, Bargi Bandh Visthapith evam Prabhavit Sangh, Madhya Pradesh
- Ramnarayan K, Natural History and Climate Change Educator, Uttarakhand
- Rohit Prajapati, Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti, Gujarat
- S.P. Ravi, Chalakudypuzha Samrakshna Samiti/River Research Centre, Kerala
- Samita Kaur, We Support Farmers, Punjab
- Santosh Lalwani, Pune River Revival, Pune
- Sarath Cheloor, NAPM Keralam
- Sirat Satpute, NAPM Maharashtra
- Soumya Dutta, MAUSAM (Movement for Advancing Understanding of Sustainability and Mutuality), Delhi
- Stella James, Independent researcher, Karnataka
- Sunil M. Caleb, Retired Lecturer, Kolkata
- Tannuja Chauhan, Artist and activist, Save Dwarka Forest, Delhi
- Varun John, Independent Consultant Urban Sustainability, Bengaluru
- Yash Agrawal, Assistant Professor of philosophy, Co-ordinator, Fridays For Future Mumbai, Navi Mumbai
- Youth for Himalaya, Himalayan Region
- Yuvraj Gatkal – Sarvoday / NAPM Maharashtra
| E-mail: [email protected]
