Welcome to the April 2026 edition of our environment, social, and governance (“ESG”) monthly newsletter. In this issue, we highlight key regulatory updates, policy changes, and recent judicial decisions that are shaping India’s environmental compliance landscape. These developments have direct implications for your business operations.
Updates from Sarthak on ESG
This April, our team convened a closed-door virtual consultation with original equipment manufacturers (“OEMs”); financial institutions and non-banking financial companies (“NBFCs”); charging infrastructure operators, fleet aggregators, delivery service providers and real estate developers on the Draft Delhi Electric Vehicle (EV) Policy 2026 (“Draft Policy”). To ensure maximum value and focused dialogue, attendance was by invitation only. The consultation sessions were conducted virtually under the Chatham House Rule.
For these closed-door stakeholder consultation on the Draft Policy, our team prepared and circulated this Background Note on the Draft Policy. This Background Note is organised in two parts: a structured summary of the Draft Policy’s key provisions, followed by an analysis of significant implementation issues and a stakeholder impact assessment by industry segment.
Regulatory Alerts
The Central Pollution Control Board (“CPCB”) has issued directions to the State Pollution Control Boards (“SPCBs”) and Pollution Control Committees (“PCCs”) under Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, regarding the registration of Registered Vehicle Scrapping Facilities (“RVSFs”) on the EPR portal for End of Life Vehicles. Among other things, the directions issued require all Producers and RVSF’s to register on the extended producer responsibility (“EPR”) end-of-life vehicles (“ELV”) portal at the earliest. Further, SPCBs and PCCs has been directed to expedite the process of grant of Consent to Establish (“CTE”) and Consent to Operate (“CTO”) to RVSF’s and to facilitate the transition of informal or illegal vehicle scrapping facilities into the formal system by providing necessary technical support, handholding and guidance from the public regarding such activities.
The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (“MoEFCC”) has published the draft notification of the Tar-balls Management Rules, 2026. The draft rules provide a comprehensive regulatory framework for managing weathered oil spill products. These draft rules mandate a multi-tiered response: oil facility owners must prioritize prevention and adhere to national contingency plans, while the Indian Coast Guard handles surveillance and emergency alerts. On land, state governments and district administrations are tasked with reporting, shoreline cleanup, and the safe transport of tar-balls to authorized treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (“TSDFs”). Oversight is provided by the CPCB and SPCBs, which manage authorizations, technical guidelines, and database tracking.
The Commission for Air Quality Management (“CAQM”) has imposed environmental compensation of around INR 61.85 crore against 6 coal-based thermal power plants (“TPPs”) located within a radius of 300 km of Delhi for non-compliance/ contravention of statutory provisions which mandated use of five percent blend of pellets or briquettes made of paddy straw crop residue along with coal.
From the docket
In Vanashakti v. Union of India, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India (“Supreme Court”) has reserved judgment on a batch of petitions challenging the regime permitting post-facto EC under Office Memoranda issued pursuant to the EIA Notification, 2006, and has permitted parties to file written submissions.
In “In Re: Illegal Sand Mining in the National Chambal Sanctuary and Threat to Endangered Aquatic Wildlife”, the Supreme Court, in suo motu proceedings concerning rampant illegal sand mining within the National Chambal Gharial Sanctuary has issued interim directions to the States of Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh. These interim directions include the installation of Wi-Fi-enabled CCTV cameras on elevated masts along routes used for illegal sand mining; seizure of offending vehicles and prosecution of those involved; recovery of environmental compensation from violators under the “polluter pays” principle; deployment of adequately trained and equipped enforcement personnel; and formulation of a uniform inter-State Standard Operating Procedure to deal with organised and violent resistance.
In Kanha Hotels and Spa Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors., the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Bench at Jaipur has quashed the decision of the Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife declining wildlife clearance to the petitioner’s Five-Star hotel located approximately 97 metres from the boundary of the Nahargarh Wildlife Sanctuary. The High Court held that the project squarely qualifies as an “existing unit” under Para 10.4 of the Zonal Master Plan read with the Eco-Sensitive Zone (“ESZ”) Notification dated 08.03.2019. The High Court further noted that the project has secured requisite approvals prior to the cut-off date and that the requirement of prior clearance from the Standing Committee did not arise in view of the Office Memorandum dated 08.08.2019 issued by the MoEFCC (IA Division), since the site lies outside the notified ESZ. The impugned decision was further held to be non-speaking, ex parte and rendered without application of mind in violation of audi alteram partem.
In Renu Bala v. MoEF&CC & Ors., the Principal Bench of the National Green Tribunal (“NGT”) has held that no valid environmental clearance (“EC”) had been granted to “The Omaxe State” project at Dwarka, New Delhi and has rejected the plea of deemed clearance. Finding prima facie evidence of illegal tree felling and unauthorised construction, the NGT directed the Divisional Forest Officer (“DFO”) / Tree Officer to ascertain the number of trees which were illegally cut/felled by the project proponent and take punitive and remedial action against the project proponent. Further, the MoEFCC has been directed to decide the pending EC application in light of the violations, and the Delhi Pollution Control Committee (“DPCC”) has been directed to ascertain the violation of environmental norms and to take appropriate punitive and remedial measures.
In suo motu proceedings titled News Item Titled ‘NHAI Has Made Highway at Protected Pond Site in Delhi Activists’ v. Delhi Pollution Control Committee & Ors., the Principal Bench of the NGT held that National Highways Authority of India (“NHAI”) had constructed eight pillars inside a listed and protected wetland at Goyla Khurd, Delhi, without proper disclosure during the EC process, thereby violating the Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules and the conditions of the EC. The NGT directed the MoEFCC to examine the EC violations and take appropriate decision. Further, the DPCC and NHAI have been directed to ascertain damage caused to the water body in the course of construction and ensure remedial action by NHAI within six months. Additionally, DPCC has been directed to ascertain the environmental damage compensation and to recover the same within six months.
In Narender Sirohi vs State of Uttar Pradesh, the Principal Bench of the NGT has issued notice in an Application alleging that hotels, restaurants and dhabas in Mathura are operating without the requisite CTE and CTO and are discharging untreated effluent into open land and the public sewerage system.
In Mahatab Alam vs Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi., the Principal Bench of the NGT has disposed of the Application alleging illegal dumping of solid waste at a non-designated public site by directing the Commissioner of Municipal Corporation Delhi to consider the Applicant’s complaint and take remedial measures preferably within six (06) weeks. Further, the Applicant has been permitted to complain to the Member Secretary, DPCC, who on receipt of the said complaint has been directed to inspect the site and impose environmental compensation if any violation is found.
In Rohit Tyagi vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi, the Principal Bench of the NGT has issued notice in an Application alleging illegal constructions are coming up on the Yamuna river bank under the guise of New Aruna Nagar Welfare Association by alleging that this Association has permitted new constructions to come up by encroaching upon the flood plain of river Yamuna.
In News Item Titled “High Lead Contamination near Battery Recycling Units: Study” Appearing in the Hindu Dated 09.04.2026., the Principal Bench of the NGT has registered an original application suo motu on the basis of the news item titled as, “High Lead Contamination near Battery Recycling Units: Study” published in The Hindu dated 09.04.2026. As per this news item, lead contamination of 100 parts per million (“ppm”) to 43,800 ppm have been shown in soil samples collected near lead-acid battery recycling units. The Tribunal has impleaded CPCB, DPCC and the MoEFCC as respondents in this matter and directed them to file their response.
In Kanahi Ram Patel & Ors. v. Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change & Ors., the Central Zone Bench of the NGT has upheld the EC granted to the Gare Palma Sector-II Coal Mine Project in Chhattisgarh. While dismissing this Appeal, the Tribunal held that the objections had already been considered by the MoEFCC and the Expert Appraisal Committee in accordance with law. The Tribunal further observed since the State is dependent on energy, therefore, this project is of national importance.
In Aman Laddha vs Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board and Ors., the Central Zone Bench of the NGT, in a matter alleging illegal operation of two tyre retreading units in Bhilwara district without the requisite CTE and CTO under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, has directed a Joint Committee to visit the site and submit a factual and action-taken report within six weeks.
In M/s. Dharti Quarry vs. SEIAA, Gujarat & Ors., the Western Zone Bench of the NGT has set aside the orders of State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (“SEIAA”), Gujarat rejecting re-appraisal of EC for mining projects on the ground of proximity to roads and water bodies. Further, SEIAA, Gujarat has been directed to make fresh consideration of the applications after correcting discrepancies in the geographical coordinates of the mining lease areas through proper demarcation and verification by the concerned authorities.
In Tanaji Balasaheb Gambhire v. Union of India & Ors., the Western Zone Bench of the NGT has dismissed M/s Prayeja City’s review application, holding that a pending application for ex-post facto EC does not affect liability for violations already committed and that environmental compensation can still be imposed, though confined to violations falling within the prescribed five-year limitation period.
That’s all we have for you this month.
From the directions issued by the CPCB to the SPCBs / PCCs regarding the registration of RVSFs on the EPR portal for End of Life Vehicles to concerns with regard to rampant illegal sand mining and illegal operation of tyre retreading units, April has been a busy month for India’s environmental compliance landscape. We hope that this ESG update will prove useful for you and that you will be watching out for these again next month.
Disclaimer
The content provided in this newsletter is intended for general awareness and should not be considered as legal advice. Readers are advised to consult with a qualified legal professional regarding any specific issues mentioned herein. If you have any questions about any of these developments or would like to see something different next month, reach out to us at knowledge@sarthaklaw.com.