Climate Change Litigation in India: Emerging Trends and Challenges

Climate change is no longer a distant concern; it is a pressing reality that threatens the very survival of humanity. Rising temperatures, erratic rainfall, extreme weather events, and melting glaciers are already affecting millions in India. As one of the world’s most vulnerable countries, India faces a dual challenge: balancing its development needs with environmental sustainability. Against this backdrop, the judiciary has emerged as a crucial forum for addressing climate concerns, giving rise to what is now known as climate change litigation. This article explores the evolution of climate litigation in India, key judicial pronouncements, statutory frameworks, global trends, and the challenges that lie ahead.

The Growing Relevance of Climate Litigation

India’s economy is heavily dependent on agriculture, forestry, and natural resources, making it highly sensitive to climate change. Rising sea levels threaten coastal areas, while melting Himalayan glaciers endanger rivers that sustain millions. Urban areas struggle with air pollution, heat waves, and water scarcity.

These crises have triggered increasing resort to the courts by environmentalists, NGOs, and even ordinary citizens, seeking enforcement of fundamental rights and accountability from the state and private actors. Climate litigation in India is thus closely tied to constitutional rights, particularly the right to life under Article 21.

Legal and Constitutional Framework

India does not have a dedicated climate change law, but environmental governance is guided by a combination of constitutional provisions, statutes, and policies.

• Article 21 (Right to Life): The Supreme Court has interpreted this to include the right to a healthy environment.
• Article 48A (Directive Principles): Mandates the State to protect and improve the environment.
• Article 51A(g) (Fundamental Duty): Imposes a duty on citizens to protect the environment.
• Environment Protection Act, 1986 (EPA): Enacted after the Bhopal Gas tragedy, this provides a comprehensive framework for environmental regulation.
• Air Act, 1981 and Water Act, 1974: Regulate pollution control.
• National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC), 2008: Policy framework with eight “missions” for climate mitigation and adaptation.

Together, these form the backbone of India’s climate governance, which courts often draw upon in litigation.

Landmark Judicial Pronouncements

1. MC Mehta v. Union of India (Ganga Pollution, Oleum Gas Leak, Taj Trapezium cases): While predating the climate debate, these cases laid the foundation for environmental jurisprudence in India by recognizing the polluter pays and precautionary principles.
2. Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India (1996): The Supreme Court reaffirmed that industries causing environmental harm are strictly liable to compensate affected communities.
3. T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India (Ongoing Forest Case): Through continuous monitoring, the Court expanded forest conservation, indirectly contributing to climate change mitigation.
4. Hanuman Laxman Aroskar v. Union of India (2019): The Supreme Court quashed environmental clearances for the Mopa airport project in Goa, emphasizing sustainable development and rigorous environmental assessment.
5. M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India (2021, Gujarat High Court): The Court ordered steps to protect the Great Indian Bustard by mandating undergrounding of transmission lines, recognizing the link between renewable energy projects and ecological concerns.

These judgments collectively establish that courts view environmental protection as integral to constitutional rights.

Climate Litigation in Recent Times

In recent years, climate litigation has taken on new dimensions:

• Air Pollution Cases: The Supreme Court and the National Green Tribunal (NGT) have repeatedly intervened to address Delhi’s hazardous air quality, ordering measures like odd-even traffic rules, closure of polluting industries, and stubble burning controls.
• Renewable Energy Projects: Courts are increasingly balancing the need for renewable energy with biodiversity protection, as seen in the Great Indian Bustard case.
• Public Trust Doctrine: Courts have invoked this principle to hold that natural resources are held in trust by the state for the benefit of future generations.
• Children and Future Generations: Petitions have argued that climate inaction violates the rights of future generations, echoing global trends like the Juliana v. United States case.

Comparative Global Developments

Globally, climate litigation has surged, with several landmark cases influencing Indian debates:

• Urgenda Foundation v. State of Netherlands (2019): Dutch courts ordered the government to cut greenhouse gas emissions, recognizing climate change as a human rights issue.
• Leghari v. Federation of Pakistan (2015): The Lahore High Court directed Pakistan’s government to implement its climate policies, citing citizens’ fundamental rights.
• Friends of the Irish Environment v. Ireland (2020): The Irish Supreme Court quashed the government’s climate plan as inadequate.

These cases reflect a growing judicial willingness worldwide to hold governments accountable for climate inaction.

Challenges in Climate Change Litigation

1. Absence of a Specific Climate Law: Unlike developed countries, India lacks a comprehensive climate change statute.
2. Implementation Gap: Even when courts pass progressive orders, enforcement remains weak due to bureaucratic inertia and political resistance.
3. Balancing Development and Environment: Courts often face the dilemma of approving projects crucial for economic growth that may harm the environment.
4. Scientific Complexity: Establishing direct causation between a specific project and climate impacts can be difficult in court.
5. Fragmented Approach: Climate issues are addressed through multiple laws and policies without a unified framework.

The Way Forward

1. Comprehensive Climate Law: India must enact a dedicated climate change statute that clearly defines responsibilities, emission targets, and enforcement mechanisms.
2. Strengthening the NGT: The National Green Tribunal should be empowered with greater enforcement powers and resources.
3. Integrating Climate into Development Planning: Every infrastructure and industrial project should undergo rigorous climate impact assessments.
4. Community Participation: Courts and regulators should ensure that vulnerable communities, particularly indigenous groups, have a say in decisions affecting their environment.
5. International Cooperation: India should actively engage in global climate negotiations and align domestic laws with international commitments like the Paris Agreement.

Conclusion

Climate change is not just an environmental concern; it is a matter of human rights, intergenerational justice, and sustainable development. Indian courts have been proactive in recognizing the right to a healthy environment as part of the right to life under Article 21, but much remains to be done. The future of climate litigation will depend on whether courts can compel governments and corporations to translate promises into action.

For a country as climate-vulnerable as India, litigation will continue to play a critical role in shaping policies, protecting ecosystems, and ensuring accountability. As global experiences show, the judiciary has the potential to be a powerful ally in the fight against climate change.