Climate Change Litigation in India: Emerging Trends and Legal Strategies

Introduction

Climate change stands today as not merely an environmental problem, but a profound existential challenge with sweeping social, economic, and legal dimensions. Its impacts are felt across sectors like agriculture, health, infrastructure, and livelihoods. While policy frameworks and international agreements shape much of the governmental response, litigation has emerged as an increasingly powerful instrument to advance climate accountability. In India, climate change litigation is still an emerging field, but it is gaining momentum, driven by creative legal strategies, an assertive judiciary, and a vibrant civil society. This blog examines how climate change litigation is unfolding in India, highlights key trends, explores innovative legal strategies, and considers how this space might evolve in the years ahead.

Understanding Climate Change Litigation: The Broader Context

Climate change litigation generally involves legal actions where climate considerations are either explicitly central or form a critical underlying context. Globally, such litigation ranges from constitutional challenges against government inaction, to tort claims against corporations for climate-related harms, to administrative reviews of environmental approvals that fail to account for climate impacts.

The significance of climate litigation lies in its ability to fill gaps left by slow-moving legislative processes or inadequate policy measures. It serves not only to secure justice for those adversely affected by climate change but also to drive structural changes in how governments and businesses approach climate risks.

In India, although explicitly labeled “climate cases” are relatively rare, issues such as deforestation, air quality, water management, and industrial pollution have started being articulated through the lens of climate change, traditional environmental and constitutional law frameworks.

Drivers of Climate Change Litigation in India

Several interlocking forces are propelling the growth of climate-related litigation in India.They foster a distinct legal, social, and moral climate that motivates stakeholders to approach the courts for climate accountability and better environmental governance.

1. Constitutional Rights to Life and Environment

Although the Indian Constitution does not explicitly mention “climate change,” the judiciary has long interpreted Article 21—which guarantees the fundamental right to life and personal liberty—as encompassing the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment. Petitioners increasingly argue that climate inaction, greenhouse gas emissions, and ecosystem degradation violate this expansive understanding of Article 21. This has laid a powerful constitutional foundation for climate litigation in India.

2. Statutory Environmental Frameworks

India’s legislative architecture on environmental protection is robust, though enforcement remains uneven. Key statutes include:

• The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, empowers the government to take measures to protect and improve the environment.
• The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, and Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, which establish standards and boards to monitor and control pollution.
• The Forest Conservation Act, 1980, and Biological Diversity Act, 2002, which regulate forest use and conserve biodiversity.

3. Active Civil Society and Public Interest Litigation

India comprises of NGOs, local community groups, farmers’ unions, fisherfolk associations, tribal organizations, and increasingly, youth-led movements which are pivotal in driving environmental and climate litigation.This is further supported by India’s distinctive Public Interest Litigation (PIL) system, which enables individuals or groups to petition the courts on behalf of impacted communities or for the broader public good.This makes the judiciary accessible to legal challenges that might include climate related problems.

4. India’s International Climate Commitments

India is a signatory to several international environmental agreements, including the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Kyoto Protocol, and the Paris Agreement. Although not directly enforceable in domestic courts, Indian judges frequently invoke international environmental principles to interpret domestic constitutional and statutory provisions.

Emerging Trends in Climate Change Litigation

1. Framing Climate Harms as Violations of Fundamental Rights

Petitioners argue that allowing activities that exacerbate climate risks breaches citizens’ rights to life, health, water, and livelihood. For instance, in various orders under the MC Mehta v Union of India line of cases, the Supreme Court and High Courts have invoked Article 21 to address air pollution, which also has direct links to greenhouse gas emissions.

2. Usage of Public Trust Doctrine

The public trust doctrine has become a cornerstone of Indian environmental jurisprudence. It posits that the state holds natural resources in trust for the public and for future generations. Climate petitioners are increasingly arguing that failing to mitigate emissions or protect carbon sinks like forests violates this trustee obligation.

3. Localized Climate Justice and Adaptation Claims

Another significant trend is the emergence of litigation focusing on localized impacts of climate variability. Communities affected by glacier melt in Himachal Pradesh, coastal erosion in Tamil Nadu, or drought cycles in Maharashtra are beginning to approach courts, seeking orders to strengthen local adaptation measures—such as improving watershed management, protecting mangroves, or halting unregulated construction in climate-sensitive zones.

4. Anticipating Youth and Next-Generation Claims

Globally, there is a surge in climate cases brought by young plaintiffs. In India, conversations around intergenerational rights are growing.Legal activists are working to build cases that directly claim climate inaction infringes on the rights of children and future generations under Article 21, while also drawing on the Directive Principles of State Policy that stress environmental protection.

5. Expanding the Scope to Corporate Conduct

Although most Indian climate litigation has targeted government inaction or regulatory lapses, there is rising interest in exploring corporate responsibility for climate harm. Future litigation may increasingly test whether the “polluter pays” principle under Indian law can be expanded to hold major emitters financially liable for climate adaptation costs or local damages.

Innovative Legal Strategies Shaping Climate Litigation

As climate change litigation evolves in India, litigants, lawyers, and civil society actors are developing creative approaches and strategies to navigate the absence of a dedicated climate change law.

1. Linking Climate Impacts to Existing Environmental Norms

Petitioners have started strategically embed climate arguments within established statutory regimes such as the Environment (Protection) Act, the Air and Water Acts, and forest and biodiversity laws. A common approach involves challenging approvals granted under the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process. For example, when thermal power plants, mining operations, or large infrastructure projects seek environmental clearance, litigants argue that authorities failed to adequately assess cumulative greenhouse gas emissions or ignored the project’s vulnerability to future climate extremes like floods and heatwaves.

By insisting that EIA pushes regulators and developers to address climate concerns under existing legal obligations. This approach also compels courts to interpret statutory duties indirectly advancing climate accountability.

2. Emphasizing the Precautionary Principle

The Supreme Court has endorsed this principle in landmark cases such as Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum v Union of India (1996), underscoring that lack of full scientific proof should not delay measures to avert serious environmental degradation. Climate change is inherently marked by uncertainties regarding timing, scale, and localized impacts. Yet its potential consequences are severe and often irreversible. Litigants and courts invoke the precautionary principle to argue that developmental activities likely to exacerbate climate risks should be halted or subjected to stricter scrutiny, even if precise projections of harm are not yet available.

3. Using International Climate Commitments for Interpretation

Although India’s commitments under international treaties like the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement are not self-executing in domestic law, they strongly influence judicial reasoning. Courts frequently read these commitments into constitutional and statutory duties, using them as interpretative aids. For instance, petitioners cite India’s Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs),which include pledges to reduce emissions intensity and enhance carbon sinks, and argue that governmental decisions allowing emissions-heavy projects undermines international expectations and Article 21(right to life)

This strategy strengthens arguments for climate-conscious governance by framing domestic inaction as statutory lapse and a breach of India’s international undertakings.

4. Advocating for Ecosystem-Based Adaptation

Protecting and restoring natural systems like forests, rivers, wetlands, and mangroves as frontline defenses against climate impacts. Healthy ecosystems absorb carbon, moderate floods, buffer heatwaves, and sustain water cycles, thereby reducing communities’ vulnerability to climate change.By framing ecosystem preservation as a climate adaptation imperative, litigants encourage courts to order protective measures that serve both environmental and climate objectives. This also shifts the legal discourse from narrowly preventing pollution to proactively strengthening natural defenses against climate variability, paving the way for a more holistic climate-resilient jurisprudence.

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) and Climate Matters

The NGT, formed under the NGT Act of 2010, is responsible for ensuring the swift resolution of environmental cases.Though it does not have an explicit climate change mandate, many of its orders indirectly support climate objectives by halting illegal mining, regulating construction in floodplains, or strengthening air pollution norms.

In coming years, it is likely that petitioners will begin to frame more direct climate-related pleas before the NGT, for instance demanding that climate vulnerability be a mandatory consideration in project clearances or that regional climate action plans be strictly implemented.

Challenges in Advancing Climate Litigation in India

Although climate litigation in India is steadily advancing, it still faces major challenges that influence the way these cases are presented, contested, and decided.

• Scientific and Causal Complexities

Unlike classical pollution cases, climate change operates through global atmospheric systems with multiple contributory sources such as floods destroying farmland, or a prolonged drought impacting water supplies. This makes it difficult to legally tie a single harmful event to emissions by a particular industry or the regulatory inaction of a specific authority. Moreover, climate impacts typically unfold over longer timelines, involve cumulative effects, and intersect with non-climatic factors like land-use changes or urban planning failures. As a result, courts may hesitate to impose liability without clear, incontrovertible scientific linkage.

• Balancing Climate with Development

India continues to prioritize rapid economic growth, poverty reduction, and infrastructure expansion that often rely on energy-intensive sectors like coal, steel, and large-scale construction. When climate-related litigation seeks to halt or reshape such projects on the grounds of long-term environmental or climate risks, courts are required to balance immediate socio-economic benefits against prospective ecological harm. Judicial decisions frequently grapple with this tension, weighing livelihoods, employment, and regional development against the imperatives of reducing emissions or safeguarding vulnerable ecosystems. This may lead to a more cautious approach where climate concerns are acknowledged but do not always override economic objectives.

• Procedural and Institutional Hurdles

India’s judiciary is already strained by heavy case backlogs, leading to delays that undermine the urgency needed to tackle climate risks. Many courts and regulatory bodies lack specialized climate expertise, which is critical given the technical dimensions of climate science, emissions accounting, and adaptation planning. Additionally, communities and NGOs that typically bring climate-related cases often operate with limited resources, facing logistical and financial difficulties in sustaining long legal battles. The procedural costs of gathering scientific evidence, securing expert testimony, and maintaining litigation across multiple judicial levels can be formidable, potentially discouraging.

Comparative Glimpses: Learning from Global Climate Litigation

Indian climate litigants and judges are increasingly drawing on developments in other jurisdictions, enriching local strategies and judicial reasoning with global precedents.

The Netherlands: In the landmark Urgenda Foundation v State of the Netherlands case, the Dutch Supreme Court held that inadequate governmental action on climate change violated citizens’ human rights, compelling the state to adopt more ambitious emission reduction targets.

Pakistan: In Leghari v Federation of Pakistan (2015), the Lahore High Court recognized climate adaptation as a constitutional duty, ordering the Pakistani government to implement its national climate policy to safeguard citizens from climate risks.

The Philippines: The Philippine Supreme Court, in its environmental rulings, has embraced the principle of intergenerational equity, emphasizing the rights of future generations to a healthy environment.

A Future Roadmap: Strengthening Climate Litigation in India

As climate risks intensify and the urgency of mitigation and adaptation becomes ever clearer, the role of the judiciary in upholding climate accountability will continue to grow. However, unlocking the full potential of climate litigation in India requires taking some proactive measures. These reforms could transform the existing patchwork of climate-related cases into a more coherent, accessible, and impactful legal ecosystem.

• Enacting a Cxaomprehensive Climate Change Law

One of the most decisive steps would be the enactment of a dedicated national climate change statute, a standalone climate law could clearly define rights and duties related to climate protection. It can set legally binding carbon budgets and timelines consistent with India’s Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and global climate commitments.An established enforceable obligations on government agencies and industries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, enhance carbon sinks, and implement adaptation plans. Creating robust institutional mechanisms for transparency, regular monitoring, citizen participation, and grievance redress can be proved helpful.Such a law would give courts and litigants a precise statutory framework that would also help synchronize  sectors like energy, transport, agriculture, and urban planning.

• Building Judicial and Technical Capacity

Climate litigation frequently involves intricate scientific evidence on emissions profiles, impact modeling, and adaptation measures. Enhancing judicial capacity is therefore crucial. Structured, periodic training programmes for judges and tribunal members on climate science, international climate obligations, and climate vulnerability would improve the quality and consistency of decisions. Additionally, establishing expert panels of climate scientists, ecologists, economists attached to higher courts or green benches could provide impartial technical inputs in complex cases. This would not only aid judges in interpreting highly specialized data but also reduce dependence on partisan expert witnesses presented by litigants.

• Encouraging Strategic Litigation by Youth and Affected Communities

Small farmers are facing extreme monsoons, fisherfolk facing coastal erosion, indigenous communities reliant on forests, and urban poor living in heat-prone informal settlements. Measures like expanding legal aid for environmental cases, simplifying procedural norms around standing and evidence, and actively encouraging PILs on climate issues can help. Strategic collaborations between grassroots groups and experienced NGOs or pro bono law firms can also build stronger cases that highlight on-the-ground realities.

Facilitating platforms for Indian youth to voice their climate concerns through the judiciary would not only enrich climate jurisprudence but also embed principles of fairness and long-term stewardship into the legal process.

Conclusion

Climate change litigation in India stands poised to become a powerful legal instrument. Drawing strength from constitutional rights, environmental laws, international commitments, and an evolving judicial mindset, Indian courts are increasingly prepared to address climate-related disputes. As the impacts of climate change grow more severe, from intensifying urban heatwaves to the accelerating retreat of Himalayan glaciers, the judiciary will play a vital role in protecting the interests of both present and future generations.By incorporating climate science, promoting intergenerational equity, and giving local communities a stronger voice, climate litigation can shift from being a niche legal strategy to becoming a central part of India’s climate governance. Advancing this path through well-crafted legislation, meaningful institutional reforms, and active civic engagement will be essential to ensure that India’s development remains inclusive, fair, and resilient in the face of climate challenges.

References

1. MC Mehta v Union of India (Vehicular Pollution Case) (1998) 6 SCC 60 (SC) https://indiankanoon.org/doc/228409/
2. Subhash Kumar v State of Bihar (1991) 1 SCC 598 (SC) https://indiankanoon.org/doc/569237/
3. Urgenda Foundation v State of the Netherlands (2015) https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2015:7196
4. Leghari v Federation of Pakistan (2015) https://climatecasechart.com/non-us-case/ashgar-leghari-v-federation-of-pakistan/
5. Constitution of India, article 21, Directive Principles of State Policy. https://legislative.gov.in/constitution-of-india
6. Environment (Protection) Act 1986 (India) https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A1986-29.pdf
7. Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981 (India) https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A1981-14.pdf
8. Forest (Conservation) Act 1980 (India) https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A1980-69.pdf
9. Biological Diversity Act 2002 (India) https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A2003-18.pdf
10. National Green Tribunal Act 2010 (India) https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A2010-19.pdf