Supreme Court declines to hear Jairam Ramesh’s petition on retrospective green clearances

A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi questioned how can the petitioner seek a review of its earlier verdict by way of a writ petition.

• Supreme Court rejected Jairam Ramesh's plea on environmental clearances.
• Petition was withdrawn after bench questioned its maintainability
• Court allowed withdrawal with liberty to seek remedy as per law

Did our AI summary help?

The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to entertain a petition filed by Congress leader Jairam Ramesh concerning retrospective environmental clearances to projects.

A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi questioned how can the petitioner seek a review of its earlier verdict by way of a writ petition.

"Please tell us how the writ is maintainable. We know the design behind these kind of writ petitions. There was a judgement. That has been set aside by a larger bench in review. Now, you are indirectly filing a review petition," the CJI told the counsel appearing for Ramesh. "Be ready for exemplary cost."

As the bench showed its disinclination in entertain the petition, the counsel sought permission to withdraw it.

The bench permitted him to withdraw the plea with liberty to avail remedy in accordance with law.

On November 18 last year, reversing its own verdict, the top court paved the way for retrospective environmental clearance by the Centre and other authorities to projects found violating environmental norms on payment of heavy penalties, observing that otherwise "thousands of crores of rupees would go in waste".

The top court, by a 2:1 majority, held that numerous vital public projects constructed out of public exchequer to the tune of nearly Rs 20,000 crore will be demolished if the May 16 verdict, which barred the Centre from granting retrospective environmental clearance to projects, is not recalled.

During the hearing on Thursday, the bench asked the petitioner's counsel as to why he has filed a fresh writ petition. "You know that now a three-judge bench has taken a view," the bench said.

The counsel referred to a January office memorandum and said it was issued to give effect to the apex court's verdict.

"I am saying ex-post facto clearances are wrong and I am saying the cause of action arose only after the judgement," the lawyer said. "Therefore, you can challenge a judgement in a writ petition? When the judgement is delivered by this court and the government, in compliance of that judgement, has issued a notification, you will challenge that notification?," the CJI asked, adding the petition was filed only for the media.

The counsel said if the bench was not inclined to hear the plea, he would withdraw it. "If you are aggrieved by the judgement, then you know your remedy. How can you seek a review of a judgement in a writ petition," the bench said.