Welcome to the July 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.
Regulatory Alerts
On 08 July 2026, the MoEF&CC notified amendments to the white category sectors list under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. This notification substitutes the existing schedule notified in November 2024 with a revised list comprising 87 white category sectors covering manufacturing, assembly, processing, repair, renewable energy, food processing and service activities.
On 13 July 2026, the MoEF&CC has amended the Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006 (“EIA Notification, 2006”). As per the latest amendments, the process for re-constitution of State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (“SEIAA”) shall be initiated by the State Government six months prior to expiry while the Standing Authority on Environment Impact Assessment (“SAEIA”) shall be constituted by the Central Government, under section 3 (3) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (“EP Act”). Furthermore, the SAEIA shall discharge the functions of the SEIAA in the event the SEIAA is non-functional due to expiry of its terms or on account of any other circumstances for a maximum period of six months in each case subject to another extension of up to a maximum period of six months.
On 16 July 2026, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (“MoEF&CC”) has notified the Hazardous and Other Waste (Management and Transboundary Movement) Amendment Rules, 2026. As per the Amendment Rules, 2026, Brine Sludge (Entry 16.3) has been removed from Schedule I under the process “Production of Caustic Soda and Chlorine”.
The Central Pollution Control Board (“CPCB”) has issued guidelines for collection, handling, storage and transportation of waste batteries . The guidelines anchor compliance to the hazardous waste regime, prescribe chemistry-specific storage and transport protocols, and places restriction on who may operate collection centres, thereby seeking to prevent mishandling and illegal operations in the handling of waste batteries.
The CPCB has issued guidelines for recycling of waste batteries (Lead Acid and Lithium-ion). These guidelines apply to producers, dealers, consumers and entities involved in the collection, segregation, transportation, refurbishment and recycling of all types of waste batteries, regardless of their chemistry, shape, volume, weight, material composition or use. Battery types covered include portable, automotive, industrial and EV batteries, across chemistries such as lead acid, lithium-ion, nickel, cadmium and zinc based batteries.
From the docket
In Re: Regulation of Industries in the Taj Trapezium Zone, the Supreme Court has directed that the Taj Trapezium Zone Authority (“The TTZ Authority”) to process the pending applications for establishment or expansion or relocation of mostly small or medium scale industries. However, in every such meeting, an expert representative of the Central Empowered Committee (“CEC”) and an expert representative of the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (“NEERI”) shall be invited, and no meeting shall take place unless both the subject experts are present. In the event one of the two experts’ objects to the nature of an industry, namely, classifying it not to be a ‘non-polluting industry’, such application shall not be accepted without leave of the Supreme Court. In those cases where experts from NEERI, CEC and the TTZ Authority deliver a unanimous opinion, such applications may be processed and taken to their logical conclusion strictly in accordance with law. However, all decisions must be uploaded on the website of CEC, to allow the public to submit their objections or suggestions. Those objections or suggestions will be considered by the TTZ Authority in consultation with the experts from NEERI and CEC. Every final decision shall be conveyed in advance to the learned Amicus Curiae who shall move an appropriate application before the Supreme Court if she believes that such a decision warrants judicial review by the Supreme Court.
In Kanahi Ram Patel and Ors v. Union of India and Ors., the Supreme Court partly allowed the appeal and permitted Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited (“MAHAGENCO”) to mining operations. In this case, the National Green Tribunal (“NGT”) had directed the MoEF&CC to reconsider the proposal from the stage of “conducting public consultation afresh”. The Supreme Court held that the expression “afresh” connotes that it was obligatory upon the authorities to conduct afresh public consultation, however, considering that substantial compliance with the statutory requirements had already taken place, the Supreme Court held that the absence of a fresh public consultation should not operate as a bar to the continuation of mining activities. It therefore clarified that MAHAGENCO could continue mining pending further proceedings and remitted the matter to the NGT Central Zone Bench to monitor afresh public consultation is carried out.
In Vanashakti v. Union of India, a three-judge bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India (“Supreme Court”) held that prior environmental clearances (“EC”) regime under the EIA Notification 2006 is mandatory and unless amended by an appropriate notification, would not accommodate grant of post facto EC or retention of projects where constructions have commenced or processes begun without a valid EC. Further, the Supreme Court quashed the 2021 Office Memorandum (“2021 OM”), that permitted the grant of EC to projects undertaken without obtaining prior EC with prospective effect. The ECs already granted under the 2017 Notification or the 2021 OM remains valid unless individually assailed. The Supreme Court further held that no further application for grant of ECs under the 2017 Notification and the 2021 OM shall be entertained and the Central Government has been restrained from passing administrative orders in future to grant ex post facto ECs to projects which commenced in violation of EIA Notification 2006, save and except by way of a valid notification in exercise of powers under section 3 of the EP Act.
In Md. Naheem Pasha v. Mancherial District Collector & Ors., the Southern Bench of the NGT issued comprehensive directions to improve waste management practices at the Andalamma Colony dumpsite in Mancherial district, Telangana. The NGT directed the Mancherial Municipal Corporation (“MMC”) to ensure complete door-to-door source segregation of solid waste, prevent mixing of solid waste during collection or transportation or processing. MMC shall establish and operationalise the proposed Dry Resource Collection Centre, expand wet waste composting capacity, and install the necessary machinery to process the unsegregated waste. Further, the Telangana Pollution Control Board (“TPCB”) has been directed to conduct quarterly inspections of the site to verify (i) waste received and processed; (ii) the progress of bio-mining; , (iii) the functioning of waste-processing infrastructure; and (v) fire-prevention measures.
That’s all we have for you this month. From the substitution of the white categories sectors list to the CPCB’s guidelines on the collection, transportation and handling of waste batteries, lithium-ion and lead acid batteries to the Supreme Court’s decision to draw the line on ex-post facto EC’s, July 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.