Judicial Green Light: How Indian Courts Are Leading the Fight Against Climate Change

Abstract

The acceleration of climate change has allowed the Indian courts to be an important player in shaping India’s climate response. This article critiques how Indian courts, led by the Supreme Court of India, have defined climate protection by placing it from merely a policy choice to a constitutional right. Using a wide interpretation of Article 21 and 14, as well as doctrines of Public Trust, and Sustainable Development, courts have recognized not only the right to be protected from harmful impacts of climate change but also compelled the State to align their domestic laws in accordance with international commitments. Through landmark decisions, the Indian courts have positioned themselves at the cutting edge of global climate jurisprudence and reconciled the interests of development and environmental stewardship. This article will discuss the doctrinal development of climate protection as a constitutional right, landmark cases, the blending of constitutional obligations with international commitments, and ultimately argue that India’s judicial “green light” is a positive evolution in the movement in favour of climate justice, and being a global environmental leader.

Introduction

Climate Change is the biggest challenge of our time, imperilling the environmental rights and livelihoods of billions. In India, where environmental degradation and climate vulnerability run parallel to forms of poverty, inequality, and development, the judiciary has become an important factor in shaping this country’s climate response. Through largely self-directed legislation, many Indian courts, primarily the Supreme Court, and the National Green Tribunal (NGT) have interpreted existing legislation broadly and even created new rights and duties, at times leading the way into the climate justice space.^[1][2]

Judicial Mandate in Environmental and Climate Jurisprudence

1. Historical Progression: From Environmental Protection to Climate Justice:

Environmental jurisprudence in India has deep roots in the constitutional framework and has its origins in Article 21- the right to life. The early landmark judgments, such as M.C. Mehta v. Union of India and Virender Gaur v. State of Haryana, established the right to a clean and healthy environment as part of the right to life,^[3] and over the years, the right has expanded to include the right to air, water, and soil free from pollution and the duty of the state to maintain ecological balance.

Still, explicit judicial engagement with climate change, as a distinct legal issue, has hardly been pervasive until very recently. Most of the cases focused on pollution, conservation of forests, and biodiversity, and climate change was addressed through their overlap with broader environmental concerns.^[4]

1. Rights-Based Approach and Broad Judicial Power:

The most identifiable feature of India’s environmental law jurisprudence is its rights-based approach. For example, the Supreme Court has consistently identified environmental issues with fundamental rights. It has changed standing rules to allow public interest litigation and dealt with expansive remedies beyond the immediate dispute.^[5] This allows the courts to address complex, systemic challenges like climate change, and to intervene where the executive’s inaction has been excessive.

Landmark Case Laws: Developing India’s Climate Jurisprudence

1. K. Ranjitsinh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. (2024)

 This is the most significant climate case in India’s legal history. The Supreme Court, for the first time, found an explicit “right to be free from the adverse impact of climate change” and that it is a fundamental right that comes under Articles 21 (Right to Life) and 14 (Right to Equality) of the Constitution.^2[6]

Background: The plea began as one to protect the critically endangered Great Indian Bustard and the Lesser Florican from the threat of overhead power transmission lines in their habitat.

Key Findings:

• Limitations on the interpretation of fundamental rights to include protections against climate change.
• Recognized biodiversity protection, but also recognized India’s duty as a State to facilitate and support its renewable energy and climate-related obligations.
• Issued proactive directives (bird diverters and expert committees) as opposed to simply imposing bans, noting that “green vs green” is a complex situation.
• Used both domestic constitutional law and international climate duties to formulate reasons and referred to the trend of climate litigation globally.^[7][8]

2. Ridhima Pandey v. Union of India (2017-pending)

This case is indicative of youth-led climate litigation in India and brings to light intergenerational equity and children’s rights.^[9]

Background: Nine-year-old Ridhima Pandey filed a petition against the government for inaction on climate change, seeking the court’s intervention to ensure India would comply with international climate goals and to ensure robust domestic mitigation action was implemented.

Significant Developments:

• The National Green Tribunal (NGT) dismissed the application initially on the basis that climate change considerations are already taken into account under existing law in environmental impact assessments.
• The Supreme Court has admitted the petition, appointed amici curiae, and ordered the government to prepare submissions on carbon emissions released in India and the regulatory frameworks in place.⁹
• The case continues to impact the ongoing discussion around the justiciability of climate inaction and the obligations of the state in acting as a trustee for future generations.

3. C. Mehta v. Union of India (1986 onward)

A series of leading cases established the right to a clean and healthy environment as part of Article 21.^[10]

Background: These public interest litigations addressed a variety of environmental issues, including air and water pollution and industrial accidents.

Key Principles:

• Increased locus standi in environmental cases.
• Introduced the concept of sustainable development and the Polluter Pays Principle.

4. Virender Gaur v. State of Haryana (1994)

This case established the connection between environmental protection and the right to life under Article 21.²

Key Holding: The Supreme Court was of the view that the right to the environment is a component of the right to life, and the state has to protect that right.

5. C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath (2000)

This case recognized and articulated the Public Trust Doctrine in Indian law.²

Key Holding: The State is the trustee of all natural resources, as these resources are held for the use and enjoyment of the public, and cannot be converted into private ownership or commercial exploitation.

Role of National Green Tribunal (NGT)

1. Institutional Innovation and Access to Justice

NGT was established as a tribunal in 2010 to provide a special forum for disputes regarding the environment and climate, having extensive powers to provide remedies and comply with such orders.¹  The NGT has jurisdiction to hear any civil case involving a significant question of a substantial environmental nature (including climate change).

1. Some of the Contributions of the NGT

• Municipalization of Litigation: The NGT enabled citizens, NGOs, and affected communities to contest government policies and/or decisions relating to climate and energy.
• Technical Expertise and Speed: The NGT has technical experts sitting with the judges and promotes informed decision-making that is often time-bound (for example, ordering restoration actions, payments of compensation, and taking of preventive measures).

Constitutional and International Dimensions

1. Constitutional Basis

The recognition of climate rights by the Indian judiciary is anchored in the constitutional text, which provides both a baseline and a trigger for meaningful action on climate issues.

1. Article 21: Right to Life and Personal Liberty

Article 21 of the Constitution of India guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. The Supreme Court’s expansive reading of this right in the decades that have followed has brought the right to a clean and healthy environment within the ambit of Article 21.^[11] The Supreme Court’s recent climate jurisprudence again extends Article 21, holding that protection from the effects of climate change, such as extreme weather, pollution, and depletion of resources, is useful in ensuring the quality and security of life.^[12] This reading of the Constitution places climate protection from merely being a policy choice to being a justiciable right that can be enforced against the State.^[13]

2. Article 14: Right to Equality

Article 14 guarantees equality before the law and equal protection under the law. The Supreme Court has observed that climate change poses a disproportionately serious threat to marginalized and vulnerable groups, individuals, and communities such as Indigenous peoples, women, children, and the poor, which raises significant equality concerns.^[14] In framing climate harms through the lens of Article 14, the judiciary has highlighted that the State has a legal obligation to ensure that its policy and programs on climate are not contributing to existing social and economic inequalities, and, to the extent possible, there is an expectation that the effects of climate change, both at the level of climate change on the individual and at the level of State obligations for climate change, will not lead to making these inequalities worse. ¹²

3. Directive Principles and Fundamental Duties

In addition to the justiciable rights in the Constitution, there are Directive Principles (notably under Article 48A), which require the State to “protect and improve the environment and to safeguard for the future the forests and wildlife of the country.” Under the Fundamental Duties (Article 51A(g)), each citizen is required to “protect and improve the natural environment.” Both types of references are non-justiciable but provide guiding rules for judicial and legislative interpretation. Each type also affirms the constitutional more for climate action.¹¹

4. Judicial Innovation and Doctrinal Evolution

The courts in India have gone beyond conventional interpretations and have fabricated doctrines such as the Public Trust Doctrine, Polluter Pays Principle and Sustainable Development. These doctrines have become part of the constitutional jurisprudence of India, granting the courts strong powers to question state action and to enforce climate protection as a constitutional duty/public interest.^[15]

1. Global Obligations

The courts in India are becoming increasingly aware that climate change is not just a domestic issue, but a challenge faced by the whole world and that both India and the world must respond, both domestically and internationally, to this issue. This leads to a dynamic relationship between India’s constitutional obligations and India’s global obligations.

1. Courts Referencing International Agreements and Treaties

Judicial decisions often refer to India’s obligations under international treaties and agreements, such as:

• The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
• The Paris Agreement
• The Convention on Biological Diversity

Although these treaties or agreements are not automatically enacted in Indian law, the judiciary still considers them in its interpretive exercise, especially when examining state action and the reasonableness of government policies. In this way, the court ensures that domestic law develops in line with the international community and that India’s commitments to combat climate change is more than just aspirational, but real in law.¹²

2. Accountability for Global Commitments

The invocation of international agreements allows Indian courts to hold the government accountable to its global climate commitments. For instance, the courts have analysed whether national policies are consistent with India’s NDCs under the Paris Agreement and whether the government’s actions have been sufficient for purposes of international expectations of mitigation, adaptation, and climate finance decisions.¹⁵

3. Comparative and transnational jurisprudence

Indian Courts have relied on comparative climate jurisprudence from across other jurisdictions. For example, the courts have read and at times, directly cited landmark judgments concerning climate from the courts of the Netherlands, Colombia, and Pakistan, which situates India in a wider transnational dialogue of climate rights and state responsibility. ¹²

4. Elevating Global Climate Justice

By incorporating international law in constitutional interpretation, Indian courts are adding to the global movement for climate justice. Their judgments signal not only to the domestic context but to the world that India is committed to respecting its constitutional values and its global responsibilities, and that it is domestic courts that can significantly enforce international climate standards.

Critical Evaluation: Strengths, Limitations, and How to Move Forward

1. Strengths of Judicial Leadership

• Proactive Expansion of Rights: The Indian courts have played a proactive role in advancing constitutional rights to protect against new and emerging threats, like climate change, before the legislature or executive.⁴
• Balancing Conflicts: The judiciary has been sophisticated in understanding the need to balance competing interests, such as when there is a “green versus green” conflict requiring consideration of development, biodiversity, and climate change mitigation.^5[16]
• Driving Policy Change: Judicial decisions have, on occasion, issued directions for the government to adopt more stringent standards on the environment, to produce emergency planning protocols, and to commit resources to ecological restoration.³

1. Challenges and Critiques

• Implementation Issues: Post-judicial order implementation is dependent on adherence of the parties receiving the order, and enforcement can be difficult, especially at the state and local levels.⁴
• Lack of Judicial Capacity: Governments face the difficulty of creating and implementing complicated policies. Judges and courts also do not have the expertise to make some decisions regarding climate adaptation.
• Possibilities of Juridical Overreach: There is a possibility of judicial overreach, taking into consideration how broad judicial intervention can be put into executive decision-making and potentially disrupt the separation of powers.

1. The Road Ahead

• Operationalizing the Climate Right: While the Supreme Court has recognized a right to be free from the harmful effects of climate change, this is only the first step. Future litigation and future policy development will need to flesh out the contours of this right, particularly in terms of adaptation, resilience, and the rights of disproportionately affected communities.⁴
• Building Operational Capacity: Stronger coordination between the judicial, executive branches and other subject-matter experts is essential to achieve effective climate governance.
• Integrating Climate Justice: Courts must continue economies of scale to prioritize equity and justice, ensuring that the impacts of climate change actions do not exacerbate existing inequalities.

Conclusion

The Indian judiciary has reshaped the landscape of climate governance by recognizing climate protection as a fundamental right in the Constitution. The judiciary has boldly and creatively read climate protection into Articles 21 and 14 of the Constitution, shifting climate governance from a policy-based discretionary act to an enforceable legal obligation that places the State in the role of fiduciary for present and future generations. This form of judicial activism closes the gap between environmental crises and the limited legislative and executive responses available while ensuring India’s domestic obligations align with national and global obligations. The challenge will be turning these progressive decisions into effective change on the ground, especially given the ongoing challenges of implementation and coordination. The Indian judiciary’s actions spur hope on so many levels of climate justice that defend the necessity of non-discriminatory climate governance that links human and ecological integrity while establishing India as a thought leader in the global climate jurisprudential landscape. This emerging legal landscape serves as a tent pole of hope for building just, resilient, and sustainable governance for people and the planet.

 

References

^[1] Prakriti Shah & John Doherty, Assessing and Advancing the Climate Capability of India’s Judiciary, Climate Judiciary Project (Jan. 13, 2025), https://cjp.eli.org/news/250113-assessing-and-advancing-climate-capability-indias-judiciary.

^[2] Parth Chhapolia, A Breath of Fresh Air: Indian Supreme Court Declares Protection from Climate Change a Fundamental Right, Health and Human Rights Journal (Apr. 20, 2025), https://www.hhrjournal.org/2025/04/20/a-breath-of-fresh-air-indian-supreme-court-declares-protection-from-climate-change-a-fundamental-right/

^[3] Supreme Court of India bolts Right To Life with climate justice, ET EnergyWorld (Apr. 19, 2024), https://energy.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/renewable/supreme-court-of-india-bolts-right-to-life-with-climate-justice/109874429

^[4] Navroz K. Dubash & Ankit Bhardwaj, Towards Operationalising a New Climate Right for India, The India Forum (Apr. 12, 2024), https://www.theindiaforum.in/climate-change/toward-operationalising-new-climate-right-india1.

^[5] Gunjan Soni & Jui Dharwadkar, Is Ridhima Pandey v. Union of India Going to Change the Future of Climate Change Litigation in India? – An Assessment of the Indian Supreme Court’s Recent Order, World’s Youth for Climate Justice (last visited June 15, 2025), https://www.wy4cj.org/legal-blog/is-ridhima-pandey-v-union-of-india-going-to-change-the-future-of-climate-change-litigation-in-india-an-assessment-of-the-indian-supreme-courts-recent-order

^[6] Supreme Court Review 2024: Speaking green, acting grey on key environmental issues, Supreme Court Observer (Jan. 4, 2025), https://www.scobserver.in/journal/supreme-court-review-2024-speaking-green-acting-grey-on-key-environmental-issues/

^[7] A breath of fresh air: Supreme Court’s verdict propels climate justice to the forefront in India, Climate Connection (Mar. 28, 2024), https://climateconnection.org.in/updates/breath-fresh-air-supreme-courts-verdict-propels-climate-justice-forefront-india

^[8] India’s Supreme Court Ruling Recognises a Right to be Free From Adverse Effects of Climate Change, Climate Court (Apr. 10, 2024), https://www.climate-court.com/post/india-s-supreme-court-ruling-recognises-a-right-to-be-free-from-adverse-effects-of-climate-change

^[9] Ridhima Pandey v. Union of India, Climate Change Litigation Database, Climate Case Chart (last updated Mar. 5, 2025), https://climatecasechart.com/non-us-case/pandey-v-india/

^[10] M.C. Mehta & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., (1987) 1 SCC 395, 1987 SCR (1) 819, AIR 1987 SC 1086, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1486949/

^[11] Guest Blog: Pioneering Decision from the Indian Supreme Court Recognizing Freedom from the Adverse Effects of Climate Change as a Fundamental Right, Climate Law Blog (Aug. 28, 2024), https://blogs.law.columbia.edu/climatechange/2024/08/28/guest-blog-pioneering-decision-from-the-indian-supreme-court-recognizing-freedom-from-the-adverse-effects-of-climate-change-as-a-fundamental-right/

^[12] India’s New Constitutional Climate Right: Examining the Significance of M.K. Ranjitsinh and Others v. Union of India and Others for Climate Litigation in India, VerfBlog, (Apr. 25, 2024), https://verfassungsblog.de/indias-new-constitutional-climate-right/, DOI: 10.59704/a03c6e7b7b3cc

^[13] Right against climate change part of right to life, equality: Read the Supreme Court’s exact arguments, Down To Earth (Apr. 5, 2024), https://www.downtoearth.org.in/climate-change/right-against-climate-change-part-of-right-to-life-equality-read-the-supreme-court-s-exact-arguments-95458

^[14] Right against climate change part of right to life, equality: Read the Supreme Court’s exact arguments, Down To Earth (Apr. 5, 2024), https://www.downtoearth.org.in/climate-change/right-against-climate-change-part-of-right-to-life-equality-read-the-supreme-court-s-exact-arguments-95458

^[15] Aman Mehta, Breathing Life into the Right to Life: The Indian Supreme Court and the Right to be Free from the Adverse Effects of Climate Change, IACL-AIDC Blog (Apr. 30, 2024), https://blog-iacl-aidc.org/2024-posts/2024/4/30/breathing-life-into-the-right-to-life-the-indian-supreme-court-and-the-right-to-be-free-from-the-adverse-effects-of-climate-change

^[16] M.K. Ranjitsinh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., 2024 INSC 280 (Supreme Court of India), https://www.alec.co.in/judgement-page/mk-ranjitsinh-and-ors-vs-union-of-india-and-ors