The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) 2006 Notification's General Conditions do not apply to building and construction projects listed as Items 8(a) and 8(b), affirming the intent for state-level clearance.

JUDGMENT :

R. MAHADEVAN, J.

1. We have heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants, including the intervenor, the learned Additional Solicitor General of India appearing for Respondent No. 1, and the learned senior counsel for Respondent No. 3. We have also perused the materials available on record.

2. The appellants herein are the Confederation of Real Estate Developers’ Associations of India¹[In short, “CREDAI”] (Civil Appeal No.10043 of 2024), Godrej Properties Ltd. (Civil Appeal No. 5532 of 2025), and Sai Sahara Developers Ltd. (Civil Appeal No.5533 of 2025). These appeals have been preferred under Section 22 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010²[In short, “the NGT Act”], assailing the final order dated 09.08.2024 passed by the National Green Tribunal, Central Zone Bench, Bhopal³[In short, “NGT”] in Original Application No. 93 of 2024 (CZ).

3. By the impugned order, the NGT allowed the original application filed by Respondent No. 3, and directed Respondent No. 1, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change⁴[In short, “MoEF&CC”] to ensure that all building and construction projects falling wholly or partly within 5 km of the following categories: -

(i) protected areas notified under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972,

(ii) critically polluted areas and severely polluted areas identified by Respondent No. 2, Central Pollution Control Board⁵[In short, “CPCB”],

(iii) eco-sensitive areas notified under Section 3 (2) of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986⁶[In short, “the EP Act”], and

(iv) inter-state boundaries

shall be treated as ‘Category A’ projects and appraised at the Central Level by the Sectoral Expert Appraisal Committee⁷[In short, “Central SEAC”] . Respondent No. 1 was further directed either to strictly implement the Environmental Impact Assessment Notification dated 14.09.2006⁸[In short, “EIA 2006 Notification”], or to issue a clarificatory notification.

3.1. In arriving at its conclusion, the NGT held, inter alia, that –

(i) The “General Conditions” under the EIA 2006 Notification are applicable to projects and activities covered under item 8(a) – Building and Construction Projects, and item 8(b) – Township and Area Development Projects of the Schedule thereto; and

(ii) The Notification dated 22.12.2014⁹[In short, “EIA 2014 Notification”] issued by MoEF&CC, inserting a Note under items 8(a) and 8(b) excluding the applicability of the General Conditions, stood quashed by judgment dated 06.03.2024 of the High Court of Kerala in One Earth One Life v. MoEF , WP (C) No. 3097 of 2016 . Consequently, the General Conditions now stand revived and are applicable to projects and activities under items 8(a) and 8(b) of the EIA 2006 Notification.

4. Although the appellants were not parties before the NGT, they are directly and substantially affected by the impugned order, as the findings and directions therein have an adverse bearing on their ongoing and proposed real estate projects, resulting in indefinite delays in execution and completion. The appellants, therefore, invoking their statutory right of appeal under Section 22 of the NGT Act, have approached this court with the instant appeals.

5. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant in Civil Appeal No.10043 of 2024 submitted that the appellant – CREDAI – is the apex body of private real estate developers in India, established in 1999 with the objective of transforming the real estate sector and promoting housing and habitat. It rep