Welcome to the August 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.
Updates from Sarthak on ESG
This August, in an article published in Mondaq, our colleagues examined the Central Pollution Control Board (“CPCB”) Guidelines under the Battery Waste Management Rules, 2022, governing the collection, handling, storage and transportation of waste batteries. The article outlines key compliance requirements for producers, recyclers, refurbishers, collection centres and transporters, including take-back obligations, collection-centre authorisations, chemistry-specific storage protocols, the 90-day storage limit, transportation requirements and interstate no objection certificates. It further highlights practical compliance considerations, including fire-safety measures, lithium-ion battery storage requirements, documentation and reporting obligations, and areas requiring regulatory clarification under the new framework.
In an article published in the India Business Law Journal, our colleagues examined the operationalisation of the India–Japan Joint Crediting Mechanism (“JCM”) following the adoption of the Rules of Implementation (“RoI”) on 8 June 2026. This article analyses the JCM’s two-tier regulatory framework under the Memorandum of Co-operation and the RoI, including the role of bilateral sovereign approvals in project registration, credit allocation and issuance. It also explores the framework governing eligible mitigation activities, project approvals, credit-sharing arrangements and the issuance of JCM credits.
Regulatory Alerts
On 03 August 2026, the Commission on Air Quality Management (“CAQM”) amended its previous direction to authorise certain officials in the National Capital Region (“NCR”) to file a complaint or prosecution before jurisdictional judicial magistrate, in case of gross violations of directions / orders in respect of dust / air pollution control and mitigation measures at such sites in their respective jurisdiction, besides ordering closure of such sites and imposition of environment compensation charges in such cases of gross violations, including that of the Graded Response Action Plan (“GRAP”) Schedule in respect of construction and demolition activities.
On 27 August 2026, the CPCB has issued a public notice informing that all the stakeholders are to ensure immediate registration on the Common Extended Producer Responsibility (“EPR”) Portal for Plastic Packaging which has been developed by CPCB.
From the docket
In Amravati Municipal Corporation v. Ganesh Dadarao Anasane & Ors., the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India (“Supreme Court”) directed the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (“MoEFCC”) to take into account certain principles for determination and imposition of environmental compensation referred in this judgement, as also the rules that operate in the field, to formulate the necessary guidelines to be issued under Rule 17(2) of the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2026. In this judgement, the Supreme Court has formulated eight principles for determination and imposition of environmental compensation. Some of the principles formulated by the Supreme Court are as under: (i) environmental compensation is restitutionary in nature and is paid in addition to the penalty or fine that the polluter is liable to pay; (ii) the temporal extent of paying compensation by the polluter ends only when the environmental damage is reversed; (iii) even if actual harm is not caused but is imminent or the actions / activities of the polluter have the potential to cause harm, the liability to pay compensation will come into place; (iv) any environmental compensation levied must be proportional to the damage caused by the polluter and must have some rational nexus to the pollution caused; and (v) all courts and tribunals must record reasons while determining environmental compensation, listing the factors considered, the valuation standard used to assess such damages and the formula or guidelines applied to quantify the compensation payable.
In Re: 2 Million Lives at Risk, Contamination in Jojari River, Rajasthan, the Supreme Court addressed severe degradation of the Jojari-Bandi-Luni river ecosystem. The Supreme Court directed the State of Rajasthan to constitute an Integrated Coordination Group headed by the Chief Secretary to ensure inter-departmental coordination and implementation of directions issued by the Supreme Court. Further, Integrated Coordination Group shall prepare a Comprehensive Resolution Plan with identified action points, the authority responsible for implementation, the implementation framework, measurable milestones and definite timelines for completion of each component. The State of Rajasthan has been directed to constitute River Commission / River Rejuvenation Authority with a mandate to oversee the conservation, rejuvenation and integrated management of rivers, river basins and catchment areas. Additionally, the State of Rajasthan has been directed to establish an Integrated Public Reporting and Environmental Grievance Redressal Mechanism to facilitate timely reporting of environmental violations and allied illegal activities affecting the riverine ecosystem.
In Vyakti Vikas Kendra India v. Manoj Misra (Dead) & Ors., the Supreme Court has held that the appellant is entitled to refund of the INR 5 crores deposited with Delhi Development Authority (“DDA”). Through this judgement, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal against the National Green Tribunal (“NGT”) judgment concerning environmental damage allegedly caused by the World Culture Festival held on the Yamuna floodplains in Delhi in March 2016. The Supreme Court observed that the event was organised after obtaining due permissions from the DDA. Further, the Supreme Court held that in the present case, the causal link between the event and alleged environmental damage had not been established by any standard and there is ample material on record to show that the event site was already in a dilapidated condition prior to its handing over to the appellant. Additionally, the Supreme Court noted that the NGT’s interim order dated 09.03.2016 imposing INR 5 crores environmental compensation was passed in disregard of material facts and without any objective analysis.
In BTW India Pvt. Ltd. v. Commission for Air Quality Management in NCR and Adjoining Areas & Ors., the NGT permitted an appellant having a food manufacturing unit to resume the operation of the unit subject to the appellant not using wood in the boiler and only using permissible biomass other than wood as per its consent to operate (“CTO”) conditions. This order was passed in a case where the appellant had challenged a closure order issued by the CAQM.
In News Article Titled “Toxic Gas Kills 20 in Sikkim Tunnel Efforts On to Save 5 Workers” Published By the Hindu Bureau Guwahati / New Delhi Edition Dated 22.07.2026, the NGT’s Principal Bench has taken suo-motu cognizance of a news article regarding a suspected sudden release of methane gas which killed at least 20 workers inside an under-construction tunnel of the National Hydroelectric Power Corporation (“NHPC’s”) Tessta State-VI Hydroelectric Project in Namchi District of Sikkim. The District Collector of Namchi, CPCB, Sikkim Pollution Control Board, and MoEFCC Regional Office Kolkata have been impleaded as respondents and NGT’s Principal Bench has transferred this matter to the Eastern Zonal Bench at Kolkata for further action.
That’s all we have for you this month.
From the amendment of a previous CAQM direction for authorising officials to file a complaint before jurisdictional judicial magistrate to the Supreme Court’s formulation of the eight principles for determination and imposition of environmental compensation, August 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 this 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.