Justice N Kotiswar Singh said India’s environmental law grew mainly due to the rise of PILs in the 1970s–80s. He highlighted how expanded locus standi and Article 21 shaped the country’s green jurisprudence.
New Delhi: Supreme Court Judge Justice N Kotiswar Singh has said that India’s environmental law has developed mainly because of the rise of Public Interest Litigations (PILs). He was speaking at the UN Climate Change Conference 2025 (COP30) in Belem, Brazil, on November 13.
The conference is being held from November 10 to 21.
Justice Singh explained that India went through a major shift in the late 1970s and 1980s when the judiciary became more active in protecting the environment.
He said,
“This phase of environmental awareness also coincided with the path breaking legal development taking place, initiated by the Supreme Court, the rise of the Public Interest Litigation in India.”
He added that
“The growth in environmental law can be attributed to a large extent to the growth of the PIL in the late 1970s and 1980s.”
According to him, the Supreme Court adopted a very innovative approach by widening the meaning of locus standi (the right to approach the court).
Earlier, only affected persons could file a case, but the court allowed any concerned citizen or organisation to move the court on issues affecting society. Justice Singh said the apex court moved away from the traditional approach and enabled public-spirited people to raise environmental concerns.
He highlighted that during this period, the Supreme Court was also expanding the meaning of Article 21 of the Constitution — the right to life.
He said,
“Parallel to this procedural innovation, the Supreme Court was also embarking upon an exercise of expanding the scope of Article 21 of the Constitution (right to life) to include environmental protection, building on its broad language and humanistic interpretation.”
Justice Singh noted that the
“fusion of PIL and expansive interpretation of Article 21”
became the “bedrock” of India’s environmental jurisprudence. With this strong foundation, the Supreme Court delivered several historic judgments from the 1980s onwards, setting clear environmental principles in Indian law.
Justice Singh also admitted that the Supreme Court had to deal with difficult scientific and ecological questions, even though it did not always have expert support.
He pointed out that disasters like the 1984 Bhopal Gas Tragedy forced the court to rethink its approach to industrial hazards. As a result, the court used the strict liability principle.
He said that after the tragedy, the Supreme Court developed the new Indian principle of absolute liability.
He explained that this came from the 1986 case of M.C. Mehta vs Union of India, where the court held that companies running hazardous industries must take full responsibility for any harm caused, without exceptions.
Justice Singh said that the court later introduced globally recognised principles such as the Polluter Pays Principle and the Precautionary Principle.
He explained that
“The Supreme Court has progressively adopted a range of innovative strategies to enhance the administration of justice, extending beyond environmental matters to diverse areas of public concern.”
By the 1990s, the court was building and consolidating environmental law through its judgments, which became binding under Articles 141 and 142 of the Constitution unless changed by Parliament.
Justice Singh said that through PILs and the court’s wide powers, the Supreme Court became a guardian of environmental governance. It linked Directive Principles of State Policy with Fundamental Rights and also considered natural law principles recognised by the UNFCCC.
He noted that India later set up the National Green Tribunal (NGT) in 2010 to give people a specialised platform for fast and scientific decisions on environmental disputes.
He said,
“Together, these developments transformed environmental protection from a matter of policy into a continuing constitutional commitment, where the judiciary emerged as both interpreter and enforcer of the nation’s ecological conscience.”
Justice Singh added that the judiciary always tried to fill legal gaps while keeping a balance between activism and restraint so that the courts were not seen as making policy.
Looking at the present challenges, Justice Singh said that
“As we move into the 21st century, the Supreme Court’s environmental role continues to evolve in response to new challenges. Two significant and related themes stand out: addressing the climate crisis (often through the lens of sustainable development) and protecting biodiversity amid infrastructure expansion.”
He said the court continues to adapt and respond to India’s environmental and climate-related needs.
Read More Reports On Justice N Kotiswar Singh
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
