1
Forest Rights Act, 2006 (FRA 2006) — Correcting Historical Injustice
Full name: Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006
💡 FRA 2006 = Returning Stolen Land to Its Original Owners
For 150+ years, colonial and post-colonial forest laws treated tribal communities as “encroachers” in forests they had inhabited and managed for generations. Their traditional rights — to collect forest produce, graze cattle, cultivate land, manage forests — were criminalised. FRA 2006 calls this a “historical injustice” and sets out to correct it. It recognises that forest communities are not the problem — they are often the best solution to forest conservation. Where FRA rights are recognised, communities become legal stewards of their forests — with both rights AND responsibilities to protect them.
FRA 2006 — Key Framework
- Full name: Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006
- Enacted: December 2006 | Implemented: January 2008
- Beneficiaries:
- Scheduled Tribes (STs): Must be residing in a forest area and dependent on it for livelihood
- Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (OTFDs): Non-tribal communities who have been living in a forest for at least 3 generations (75 years) before December 13, 2005
- Constitutional basis: Article 46 (protection of ST interests) | Article 244 (administration of Scheduled/Tribal Areas) | Fifth and Sixth Schedules | Articles 14, 19, 21 (life, equality, livelihood)
- Key authority: Gram Sabha is the primary authority for receiving, verifying, and recommending claims. District-level committee grants final titles. This is a bottom-up model — a fundamental departure from top-down forest bureaucracy.
- Who implements: Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) — NOT MoEFCC
Three Types of Rights Under FRA 2006
🌾
Individual Forest Rights (IFR)
Personal land rights
Right to cultivate and reside on forest land occupied before December 13, 2005. Maximum: 4 hectares per family. Cannot be transferred or sold. Inheritance allowed. Also includes right to collect and use minor forest produce (MFP) for self-consumption — bamboo, tendu, honey, roots, tubers, herbs. Herbal medicine, firewood for domestic use.
🌳
Community Forest Rights (CFR)
Collective village rights
Community’s right to protect, regenerate, conserve, and manage their community forest resource (CFR) — including right to sell Minor Forest Produce through Gram Sabha. Rights over water bodies, grazing grounds, traditional seasonal resource access, community tenures/habitat rights for PVTGs (Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups). Gram Sabha manages these collectively.
🛡️
Community Forest Resource Rights (CFRR)
Management authority over defined area
The most powerful right. Gram Sabha’s right to protect, manage, and govern a defined Community Forest Resource area — their traditional forest territory. Community can stop any activity they find harmful to their CFR. Can make rules for use of resources. Legally binding on ALL parties including forest department. “First time in Indian history ordinary citizens given legal power to protect environment.”
Critical Wildlife Habitats (CWH) — The FRA-Conservation Balance
- Definition under FRA: National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries that have been specifically and clearly notified as CWH by the appropriate authorities for the specific purpose of wildlife conservation
- Relocation from CWH: Communities can be relocated from CWH ONLY with — (1) Free, Prior, and Informed Consent from Gram Sabha | (2) All forest rights already recognised and settled | (3) Resettlement with all assured benefits per package | (4) Voluntary process — no coercive relocation
- Significance: Forest Rights Act requires forest rights to be settled BEFORE any tiger reserve core area or wildlife sanctuary relocation can happen. NTCA (National Tiger Conservation Authority) cannot relocate communities without FRA compliance.
- NTCA vs FRA: NTCA has been pushing states to relocate communities from tiger reserves. FRA activists have consistently pointed out these relocations are happening in violation of FRA — without proper rights recognition, FPIC, or gram sabha consent. This tension is ongoing.
🔴 FRA 2006 — Major Current Affairs (2024–2025) Latest
- Implementation status (May 2025): Total claims filed: 51.23 lakh at Gram Sabha level | Titles distributed: 25.11 lakh (49.02%) — nearly half of all claims have been recognised. Over 77 lakh hectares of forest land granted since 2008 — equivalent to the area of Assam (as of November 30, 2024).
- Leading states: Odisha, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh — high title distribution. Example: In Orissa’s Rayagada district, communities in Kalakani village secured 65 hectares under CFR rights. In Gajapati district, Lanjia Soura community (PVTG) secured 84.5 ha under CR and CFR rights (February 2025).
- Wildlife First case — SC challenge to FRA: NGO Wildlife First and others filed WP 109/2008 in Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of FRA 2006 — claiming the law conflicts with wildlife and forest conservation laws. The petition questions the definition of “community,” rights to non-ST communities, and alleged misuse. Case dormant since 2019, relisted for April 2, 2025.
- 2019 SC eviction order: February 13, 2019 — SC ordered eviction of those whose FRA claims were rejected — potentially affecting 1.8 million people. Massive protests. Government stayed order on February 28, 2019. States directed to review rejected claims.
- MoTA defence, October 2025: Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) sharply defended the FRA 2006 and its 2012 Rules in the Supreme Court (October 24, 2025) — arguing: FRA is within Parliament’s authority (forests in Concurrent List) | Aligns with Articles 46 and 21 | FRA goes beyond land regularisation — it restores dignity, livelihoods, and cultural identity of forest-dwelling communities.
- FCAA 2023 tension: Forest Conservation Amendment Act 2023 exemptions for border areas and national security projects bypass FRA requirements — no gram sabha consent, no social impact assessment. Critics call this a fundamental violation of FRA for millions of indigenous border communities in NE India.
2
National Green Tribunal (NGT) Act, 2010
India is the 3rd country (after Australia and New Zealand) to set up a specialised environmental tribunal
NGT — Key Framework Facts
- Established: October 18, 2010 under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010
- HQ: New Delhi (Principal Bench) | Regional Benches: Bhopal (Central), Pune (Western), Kolkata (Eastern), Chennai (Southern) — 5 benches total
- India’s distinction: 3rd country in the world to set up such a tribunal, after Australia and New Zealand. First developing nation to do so.
- Composition (as per NGT Act): Chairperson + minimum 10 Judicial Members + minimum 10 Expert Members (maximum 20 each)
- Chairperson: A serving or retired Judge of the Supreme Court — appointed by Central Government in consultation with Chief Justice of India
- Judicial Members: Serving or retired Judges of High Courts
- Expert Members: Persons with expertise/experience of not less than 15 years in environmental sciences
- Tenure: 5 years | Not eligible for reappointment | Age limit: 70 years for Chairperson, 67 for others
- Disposal target: 6 months — NGT is mandated to dispose of applications within 6 months. In practice, many cases take longer.
- Appeals from NGT: Directly to the Supreme Court within 90 days. High Courts cannot entertain appeals from NGT orders (though some have — creating jurisdictional conflicts).
NGT Jurisdiction — What It Can and CANNOT Hear
Schedule I Acts (NGT has jurisdiction)
- Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
- Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977
- Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981
- Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
- Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991
- National Environment Tribunal Act, 1995
- Biological Diversity Act, 2002
- CANNOT hear: Indian Forest Act 1927 | Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 | State laws for tree/forest protection → This is a significant gap — many key environmental laws are outside NGT’s jurisdiction
NGT Powers and Principles
- Powers equivalent to Civil Court under Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
- NOT bound by CPC 1908 or Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — guided by Principles of Natural Justice. This gives flexibility but can also make proceedings less predictable.
- Principles applied: Sustainable Development | Precautionary Principle | Polluter Pays Principle
- Suo motu power (since October 2021): Supreme Court granted NGT power to take cognizance on its own — without anyone filing a case. Used frequently now to address environmental violations reported in news.
- Can award compensation: Up to 5 crore per party under EPA; higher amounts under other provisions. Awarded compensation to be deposited in Environmental Relief Fund.
- Can review own decisions: Under Rule 22 of NGT Rules
- NGT orders are equivalent to Civil Court decrees — enforceable as such
🔴 NGT — Current Challenges 2024–2025 Current Affairs
- Severe understaffing: As of September 2024, NGT has only 6 judicial members functioning against a required strength of 20. Also only 5 expert members against required 10. MoEF issued order appointing 2 judicial + 4 expert members (Vision IAS, August 2025) — still far short.
- Case backlog: Over 88,400 environmental cases pending trial in India (NCRB 2022). NGT had a 60% disposal rate till 2014 — has declined since.
- NGT larger bench on CRZ 2019: October 16, 2024 — NGT Western Bench (Pune) constituted a larger bench to hear challenge to CRZ Notification 2019. November 11, 2024 — larger bench expanded scope to include all coastal states and UTs. Hearing scheduled for December 2025.
- Key challenges: Limited jurisdiction (cannot hear IFA/WPA cases) | HC interference in NGT appeal chain | No clear compensation calculation methodology | Government departments frequently fail to execute NGT orders | Inadequate funding and staff
- Key successes: Ban on diesel vehicles older than 15 years in Delhi | Action on Yamuna pollution | GRAP implementation | Industrial closure orders | Suo motu cases on solid waste
3
Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Notification — 1991 → 2011 → 2019
India’s 7,500+ km coastline · Issued under EPA 1986 · High Tide Line to 500m inland
💡 CRZ = An Environmental Buffer Zone Between Land and Sea
India’s coastline supports 250+ million people — fishers, farmers, urban dwellers — and hosts some of the world’s most fragile ecosystems (mangroves, coral reefs, estuaries, turtle nesting beaches). The CRZ notification creates a regulated zone along the coast where certain activities are restricted or prohibited — to protect this ecological treasure while allowing sustainable development. The “High Tide Line” is the key boundary — activities are regulated within 500 metres of the HTL towards land, and from the Low Tide Line to 12 nautical miles seaward.
CRZ — Key Definitions (Prelims Critical)
- High Tide Line (HTL): The line on land up to which the highest water reaches during spring tides. The primary CRZ reference line.
- Low Tide Line (LTL): The line on land up to which the lowest water reaches during spring tides.
- Spring Tides: Tides occurring when the sun, moon, and Earth are aligned (new moon and full moon) — highest high tides and lowest low tides of the month.
- No Development Zone (NDZ): The zone between the HTL and a specified distance inland where no construction is permitted. The NDZ distance varies by zone classification.
- CRZ Area: Coastal areas up to 500 m from HTL + land between LTL and HTL. Along rivers/creeks/estuaries: up to 100 m from the bank subject to tidal influence.
- Issued under: Section 3 of Environment Protection Act, 1986
- Implementation agencies: National Coastal Zone Management Authority (NCZMA) at central level | State/UT Coastal Zone Management Authorities (SCZMAs) | District Level Committees (DLCs)
CRZ 2019 (Current) — Four Zone Classification
CRZ-I
Ecologically Sensitive Areas (ESAs)
Most protected zone. Mangroves, coral reefs, salt marshes, sea grass beds, Ramsar sites, biosphere reserves, turtle nesting grounds, marine parks — AND the area between LTL and HTL. No new construction permitted except: Defence/Strategic projects | Department of Atomic Energy | Trans-harbour sea links | Roads without affecting tidal flow. Sub-categories: CRZ-IA (ESAs) + CRZ-IB (LTL to HTL area)
CRZ-II
Urban Areas — Developed Coastline
Areas that have been developed up to or close to the shoreline with roads, water supply, sewerage. Legally designated municipal limits. Construction only on landward side of existing road/structure. CRZ 2019 change: Lifted the freeze on FSI/FAR at 1991 Development Control Rules — allows current FSI for redevelopment. This was controversial — increases construction density near coast.
CRZ-III
Rural/Relatively Undisturbed Areas
Relatively undisturbed areas — mainly rural/fishing communities. No new construction in NDZ. Existing legal structures can be repaired. Key CRZ 2019 change — two sub-categories:
• CRZ-IIIA: Dense rural areas (population density ≥2,161/sq km) — NDZ reduced from 200m → 50m from HTL. Major relaxation.
• CRZ-IIIB: Less dense rural areas (below 2,161/sq km) — NDZ remains 200m from HTL.
• CRZ-IIIA: Dense rural areas (population density ≥2,161/sq km) — NDZ reduced from 200m → 50m from HTL. Major relaxation.
• CRZ-IIIB: Less dense rural areas (below 2,161/sq km) — NDZ remains 200m from HTL.
CRZ-IV
Andaman & Nicobar, Lakshadweep & Small Islands
Water area from LTL to 12 nautical miles seaward. Also applies to Andaman & Nicobar Islands, Lakshadweep, and other small islands. Except for fishing and related activities, all activities impinging on the sea and tidal waters are regulated. CRZ 2019: Islands close to mainland coast — NDZ of only 20m. Backwater islands — NDZ of 20m.
CRZ Notification History — 1991 → 2011 → 2018/2019
- CRZ 1991 (First notification): Uniform rules for entire coastline — no differentiation between urban/rural/island/ecologically sensitive. Caused hardship to traditional fishing communities. No clear procedure for clearances. No post-clearance monitoring.
- CRZ 2011: Major overhaul. Addressed CRZ 1991 failures. Introduced differentiated zones. Better consultation with coastal communities. Included sea level rise and climate hazards. Established NCZMA and SCZMAs formally. Froze FSI for CRZ-II areas at 1991 DCR levels (preventing high-rise construction).
- CRZ 2018 (Cabinet approved Dec 2018) / CRZ 2019 (Notified Jan 2019): Based on recommendations of Shailesh Nayak Committee (constituted 2014). Key changes: FSI freeze lifted for CRZ-II | NDZ reduced to 50m for dense rural CRZ-III A | 20m NDZ for islands | Eco-sensitive area in CRZ-I updated | Tourism facilities allowed in some areas | Streamlined clearance process.
- Maradu demolition (Kerala, 2020): Supreme Court ordered demolition of 4 luxury high-rise apartment complexes in Maradu municipality, Kochi — built in CRZ violation. Demolished January 11-12, 2020. Landmark enforcement case showing CRZ violations have consequences.
- NGT challenge to CRZ 2019 (2024): NGT Western Bench (Pune) constituted a larger bench (October 16, 2024) to hear challenge to CRZ Notification 2019. November 11, 2024: larger bench expanded scope — all coastal states and UTs notified. Hearing: December 2025. Major current affairs.
4
Chemical Disaster Laws & Liability Principles
Post-Bhopal legal framework · Strict Liability vs Absolute Liability — a critical UPSC distinction
Key Laws for Chemical Disaster Protection
- Environment Protection Act, 1986: Umbrella framework — empowers government to regulate hazardous industries and substances
- Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemicals Rules, 1989: Under EPA 1986. Lists hazardous chemicals, thresholds for “major accident hazards,” reporting requirements, emergency planning. Requires on-site and off-site emergency plans for major accident hazard industries.
- Public Liability Insurance Act (PLIA), 1991: Enacted directly to address post-Bhopal concerns. Mandatory insurance for industries handling hazardous substances — so victims of industrial accidents can be compensated quickly without prolonged litigation. Creates Environmental Relief Fund for no-fault compensation. Administered by National Green Tribunal.
- National Disaster Management Act, 2005: Provides framework for chemical/industrial disasters as “notified disasters” — triggers NDMA, SDMA, DDMA response. National Chemical Disaster Management Policy 2019 issued under this Act.
- Current gap: India lacks a dedicated Chemical Accidents Emergency Planning, Preparedness, and Response (CAEPR) Act — unlike the US (CERCLA, SARA) and EU (Seveso Directive). Multiple overlapping laws with unclear jurisdictions between NDMA, CPCB, MoEF, and industry ministries.
Strict Liability vs Absolute Liability — The Most Important UPSC Legal Distinction
| Aspect | Strict Liability (English Law) | Absolute Liability (India) |
|---|---|---|
| Origin | Rylands v. Fletcher (1868) — English case law | M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987) — Indian Supreme Court |
| Principle | If someone brings something dangerous onto their land and it escapes causing harm, they are liable — even without negligence | Any enterprise engaged in hazardous activity is absolutely liable for ALL damage caused — no exceptions whatsoever |
| Exceptions allowed? | YES — Act of God, third party act, consent of plaintiff, statutory authority can be used as defences | NO — No exceptions. No defences. Absolute means absolute. |
| Standard | Strict but can be escaped with valid defences | Stricter than strict — truly absolute. Cannot escape with any defence. |
| Why India adopted Absolute Liability? | — | M.C. Mehta case: SC said English rule (Rylands) was developed in 1868 and inadequate for modern industrial enterprises. India needs a higher standard given massive scale and potential harm of modern hazardous industries like Bhopal. |
| Compensation quantum | Commensurate with actual damage | Must be commensurate with the magnitude and capacity of the enterprise — larger the enterprise, higher the compensation. “Absolute liability” extends to exemplary damages. |
| UPSC trigger case | Rylands v. Fletcher 1868 (English) | M.C. Mehta v. Union of India 1987 (Indian SC — Oleum gas leak case from Delhi chemical plant) |
5
National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) — 8 Missions
Launched June 30, 2008 · PM’s Council on Climate Change · India’s comprehensive climate response framework
NAPCC — Key Framework
- Launched: June 30, 2008 by PM’s Council on Climate Change
- Purpose: India’s national framework to address climate change — through adaptation AND mitigation — while promoting sustainable development
- Eight National Missions: Each mission has a dedicated Ministry/Department, specific targets, and funding mechanisms
- Key principle: Development AND environment together — India argued climate action must not impede development of its poorest citizens
- State Action Plans on Climate Change (SAPCCs): States required to develop their own SAPCCs aligned with NAPCC
- Connection to Paris Agreement: NAPCC missions feed into India’s NDC commitments — renewable energy, energy efficiency, forest sinks, water conservation
☀️
National Solar Mission (JNNSM)
MoNRE · Started 2010
Original target: 20,000 MW solar by 2022. Revised target: 100 GW solar by 2022 (later extended). Current target: 500 GW non-fossil by 2030 (from all RE sources). Milestone: India achieved 100 GW solar capacity on January 31, 2025. Solar module production capacity: 60 GW in 2024 → target 100 GW by 2030. India: 4th globally in solar installed capacity. PM Surya Ghar Muft Bijli Yojana (2024) — near 9 lakh rooftop installations.
⚡
National Mission for Enhanced Energy Efficiency (NMEEE)
MoP · Approved 2009
Based on Energy Conservation Act, 2001. Key scheme: PAT (Perform, Achieve and Trade) — market-based mechanism where energy-intensive industries get targets; those who over-achieve get “Energy Saving Certificates” (ESCerts) that can be traded to those who fall short. Also: UJALA scheme (LED bulbs), ECBC (Energy Conservation Building Code), BEE (Bureau of Energy Efficiency) as implementing agency.
🏙️
National Mission on Sustainable Habitat
MoHUA · Approved 2011
Promote energy efficiency in buildings | Improve urban solid waste management | Reduce carbon emissions in transport. Key schemes: ECBC (Energy Conservation Building Code) | Green Rating for Integrated Habitat Assessment (GRIHA — India’s green building rating) | Smart Cities Mission (aligns) | FAME scheme for EVs aligns with transport component.
💧
National Water Mission (NWM)
MoJS · Approved 2011
Goal: 20% improvement in water use efficiency. Integrated water resources management. National Water Policy 2012 framed under this. Key: basin-level water management | groundwater regulation | improved irrigation efficiency | drip and sprinkler adoption. Jal Jeevan Mission (har ghar jal) and Atal Bhujal Yojana are related programmes aligning with NWM goals.
🏔️
National Mission for Sustaining the Himalayan Ecosystem (NMSHE)
DST · Approved 2010
Protect Himalayan glaciers, mountain forests, biodiversity, and river systems. Maintain Himalayan ecosystem services — water security, biodiversity, monsoon regulation. Key concern: Himalayan glaciers melting (23/24 Central Himalayan glaciers losing mass, WMO 2024). GLOF risk, permafrost thaw, species displacement upward. Monitored by Department of Science & Technology.
🌲
National Mission for Green India (GIM)
MoEFCC · 2011-2030
Increase forest/tree cover by 5 million hectares + improve quality of existing 5 million hectares = 10 million hectares total by 2020 (now 2030). Revised 2025: ₹12,190 crore outlay | Micro-ecosystem approach | Aravallis, Western Ghats, arid NW regions, mangroves, Himalayas. Contributes India’s NDC carbon sink of 2.5–3 Bn tonnes CO₂e by 2030.
🌾
National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture (NMSA)
MoAFW · 2011
Develop climate-resilient agriculture — drought/flood/pest resistant varieties | Improve water use efficiency in agriculture | Soil health management (Soil Health Cards) | Organic farming | Integrated farming systems. PMKSY (Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojana) aligns with NMSA’s water efficiency goals. Paramparagat Krishi Vikas Yojana (PKVY) for organic farming.
🔬
National Mission on Strategic Knowledge for Climate Change (NMSKCC)
DST · 2011
Build India’s scientific capacity and knowledge base for climate change research. Fund climate research institutions | Create National Carbon Inventory | Develop data-sharing networks | Connect Indian scientists with international research. Least visible of the 8 missions — primarily research/capacity building without large public schemes.
🔴 NAPCC Achievements and Current Status Updated 2025
- Solar Mission — Greatest Success: India achieved 100 GW solar capacity on January 31, 2025 — surpassing the revised 100 GW target (originally set for 2022). India is now 4th globally in solar capacity. Solar module manufacturing: 60 GW capacity in 2024 → targeting 100 GW by 2030. India’s solar export value rose 23× to $2 billion in FY2024.
- Non-fossil electricity target: India has already achieved 50% non-fossil installed capacity — ahead of the 2030 target. PM Modi confirmed this achievement in 2025.
- PAT Scheme (Energy Efficiency): 13 sectors (cement, steel, aluminium, fertilisers, power plants, pulp & paper, textile, railways, etc.) covered. Over 4,000+ designated consumers. PAT Cycles I to VI have been implemented. Major success in industrial energy efficiency.
- Green India Mission — Revised 2025: ₹12,190 crore financial outlay | Micro-ecosystem approach | ₹909.82 crore allocated to 17 states for 1,55,130 ha by July 2024.
- Water Mission challenges: Groundwater depletion accelerating in Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan despite programmes. Agriculture sector remains the biggest water user (85%). Jal Jeevan Mission and Atal Bhujal Yojana providing additional impetus.
- NMSHE: Himalayan situation worsening — 23/24 Central Himalayan glaciers losing mass (WMO Asia 2024). GLOFs increasing (Sikkim 2023). Mission needs urgent acceleration. India’s first winter Arctic expedition (March 2024) — comparative cryosphere research.
⭐ National Environmental Legislation Part II — Mega Cheat Sheet
- FRA 2006 full name: Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 | Ministry: Tribal Affairs (MoTA) — NOT MoEFCC
- FRA beneficiaries: STs (any generation, resident in forest) + OTFDs (non-tribal, 3 generations/75 years in forest before Dec 13, 2005)
- FRA three rights: IFR (Individual — cultivate up to 4 ha, MFP) + CFR (Community — manage, sell MFP through Gram Sabha) + CFRR (Community Forest Resource Rights — govern/protect defined area)
- FRA authority: Gram Sabha = primary authority for receiving and verifying claims | District level = final titles | Bottom-up approach
- FRA implementation (May 2025): 51.23 lakh claims filed | 25.11 lakh titles distributed (49.02%) | 77 lakh hectares granted since 2008 (= area of Assam)
- FRA SC cases: Wildlife First (WP 109/2008) — challenge to FRA constitutionality | 2019 eviction order (Feb 13) → stayed Feb 28, 1.8 million affected | MoTA defended FRA Oct 24, 2025 | FRA aligns with Articles 46, 21
- CWH (Critical Wildlife Habitats): Relocation from NPs/WLSs only with: Free Prior Informed Consent + rights recognised + voluntary + resettlement package. NTCA relocations without FRA compliance are illegal.
- NGT: NGT Act 2010 | Established Oct 18, 2010 | India = 3rd country (after Australia, NZ) | 1st developing nation | HQ New Delhi | Benches: Bhopal, Pune, Kolkata, Chennai
- NGT composition: Chairperson (retired SC/HC CJ) + min 10 Judicial + min 10 Expert (max 20 each) | Actual Sept 2024: only 6 judicial + 5 expert | Tenure: 5 years, no reappointment
- NGT jurisdiction (Schedule I): Water Act 1974 + Water Cess 1977 + Air Act 1981 + EPA 1986 + PLI Act 1991 + Biological Diversity Act 2002 | CANNOT hear: IFA 1927, WPA 1972, State tree laws
- NGT key features: 6-month disposal mandate | NOT bound by CPC/Evidence Act — guided by natural justice | Principles: Sustainable Development + Precautionary + Polluter Pays | Suo motu since Oct 2021 | Appeals to SC within 90 days | Orders = Civil Court decrees
- NGT 2024-25 current affairs: Only 6 of 20 judicial members (Sept 2024) | CRZ 2019 challenge — NGT larger bench Oct 16, 2024 | All coastal states notified Nov 2024 | Hearing Dec 2025
- CRZ: Issued under EPA 1986 Section 3 | 500m from HTL landward + LTL-HTL + 100m along rivers/backwaters | HTL = highest spring tide line | LTL = lowest spring tide line | NCZMA (central) + SCZMAs + DLCs
- CRZ-I: Ecologically Sensitive Areas (mangroves, coral reefs, salt marshes, Ramsar, turtle nests) + LTL-HTL area | Most protected | No new construction except defence/DAE/sea links
- CRZ-II: Urban developed coastline | Construction on landward side | CRZ 2019: FSI freeze lifted (controversial)
- CRZ-III: Rural areas | CRZ-IIIA (dense, ≥2,161/sq km) NDZ reduced 200m → 50m | CRZ-IIIB (less dense) NDZ remains 200m
- CRZ-IV: LTL to 12 nautical miles seaward + islands | NDZ: 20m for islands near mainland/backwater islands
- CRZ history: 1991 (first, uniform, inadequate) → 2011 (differentiated, better) → 2018/2019 (Shailesh Nayak Committee, FSI lifted, NDZ 50m for dense areas)
- Maradu demolition: 4 luxury flats demolished in Kochi (Jan 11-12, 2020) by SC order for CRZ violation. Landmark enforcement case.
- Strict vs Absolute Liability: Strict = Rylands v. Fletcher 1868 (UK) — some defences possible | Absolute = M.C. Mehta v. UoI 1987 (India SC — Oleum gas leak) — NO defences, NO exceptions. Higher compensation for bigger enterprises.
- Key chemical disaster laws: EPA 1986 | Hazardous Chemicals Rules 1989 | Public Liability Insurance Act 1991 | NDMA Act 2005
- NAPCC: Launched June 30, 2008 | PM’s Council on Climate Change | 8 missions | State Action Plans (SAPCCs) required
- NAPCC 8 missions: Solar (MoNRE) | Energy Efficiency-NMEEE (MoP, PAT scheme) | Sustainable Habitat (MoHUA) | Water-NWM (MoJS) | Himalayan Ecosystem-NMSHE (DST) | Green India-GIM (MoEFCC, ₹12,190 cr) | Sustainable Agriculture-NMSA (MoAFW) | Strategic Knowledge-NMSKCC (DST)
- Solar Mission 2025: 100 GW achieved Jan 31, 2025 | 4th globally in solar | Target: 500 GW non-fossil by 2030 | Solar module capacity: 60 GW in 2024 | PM Surya Ghar scheme (~9 lakh installations 2024)
- Non-fossil target: India achieved 50% non-fossil installed capacity — AHEAD of 2030 NDC target (confirmed by PM Modi 2025)
- PAT scheme: Perform Achieve Trade | 13 sectors | Energy Saving Certificates (ESCerts) traded | BEE implements | Part of NMEEE
🧪 Practice MCQs
Q1. With reference to the Forest Rights Act, 2006 (FRA) and recent developments, which of the following is CORRECT?
1. As of May 2025, over 51 lakh claims have been filed under FRA at Gram Sabha level, of which about 49% titles have been distributed.
2. By November 2024, over 77 lakh hectares of forest land had been granted under FRA since 2008.
3. In October 2025, the Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) defended FRA’s constitutional validity before the Supreme Court.
4. The Gram Sabha is the primary authority for receiving and verifying forest rights claims under FRA.
✅ Answer: (d) All four are correct
1 ✅: As of May 31, 2025 (MoTA/PIB data), 51,23,104 claims had been filed at Gram Sabha level, of which 25,11,375 (49.02%) titles had been distributed. This is the most recent official implementation data. 2 ✅: By November 30, 2024, over 77 lakh hectares of forest land had been granted under FRA since 2008 — equivalent to the geographical area of Assam. This demonstrates FRA’s significant impact on forest governance. 3 ✅: On October 24, 2025, MoTA sharply rebutted a plea challenging the constitutional validity of FRA 2006 and its 2012 Rules in the Supreme Court (Wildlife First case). MoTA argued FRA is within Parliament’s authority (forests in Concurrent List), aligns with Articles 46 and 21, and goes beyond land regularisation to restore dignity and livelihoods. 4 ✅: FRA’s bottom-up implementation model designates the Gram Sabha as the PRIMARY authority for receiving, verifying, and recommending forest rights claims. This is a fundamental departure from the top-down forest bureaucracy model — the Gram Sabha makes the initial determination, which then goes up to the District-level Sub-divisional Committee and ultimately the District Level Committee for final title award.
Q2. Consider the following statements about the National Green Tribunal (NGT):
1. NGT was established under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 and India is the 3rd country globally to have such a tribunal.
2. NGT has jurisdiction over the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.
3. Appeals from NGT orders go directly to the Supreme Court within 90 days.
4. NGT has the power to take suo motu cognizance of environmental issues since 2021.
Select CORRECT statements:
✅ Answer: (d) — 1, 3 and 4 correct. Statement 2 is WRONG.
1 ✅: NGT was established under the NGT Act 2010 (came into existence October 18, 2010). India is the 3rd country in the world — after Australia and New Zealand — to establish a statutory environmental tribunal. It is also the first developing nation to do so. 2 ❌ Wrong (critical UPSC trap): NGT does NOT have jurisdiction over the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. The NGT Act’s Schedule I lists the specific laws over which NGT has jurisdiction — and WPA 1972 is explicitly NOT in Schedule I. Similarly, the Indian Forest Act 1927 and State laws protecting trees/forests are outside NGT’s jurisdiction. This is a significant criticism of NGT — many key wildlife and forest disputes cannot be heard by NGT and must go to High Courts. 3 ✅: NGT Act provides that appeals from NGT orders go directly to the Supreme Court within 90 days. This was intended to create a clear appellate chain — NGT → Supreme Court (bypassing High Courts). However, in practice, some High Courts have entertained environmental petitions and appeals from NGT, creating jurisdictional conflicts. 4 ✅: The Supreme Court granted NGT the power of suo motu cognizance (taking up cases on its own without a formal petition) in October 2021. Since then, NGT has been proactive in taking up environmental violations reported in news media, expanding its reach significantly.
Q3. Under the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Notification 2019, which of the following is CORRECT about No Development Zones (NDZ)?
1. CRZ-IIIA (dense rural areas with population density ≥2,161/sq km) has NDZ of 50 metres from HTL.
2. CRZ-IIIB (less dense rural areas) retains the original NDZ of 200 metres from HTL.
3. Islands close to the mainland coast and backwater islands have a NDZ of 20 metres.
4. CRZ-I (ecologically sensitive areas) has no construction permitted except defence and atomic energy projects.
✅ Answer: (d) All four are correct
All four statements describe the specific provisions of CRZ Notification 2019 accurately: 1 ✅ CRZ-IIIA — 50m NDZ: The most significant change in CRZ 2019 was the creation of the CRZ-IIIA sub-category for densely populated rural areas (population density ≥2,161 per sq km as per 2011 Census). For these areas, the NDZ was reduced from the previous 200 metres to just 50 metres from the High Tide Line. This was both praised (as sensitive to local community needs) and criticised (as weakening coastal protection). 2 ✅ CRZ-IIIB — 200m NDZ retained: For less densely populated rural areas (below 2,161/sq km), the original 200-metre NDZ from the HTL is maintained. This ensures ecological protection for less developed coastal areas. 3 ✅ Islands — 20m NDZ: The 2019 Notification introduced a specific 20-metre NDZ for all islands close to the mainland coast and for all backwater islands in the mainland — a new provision recognising the unique vulnerability of small islands. 4 ✅ CRZ-I — no construction except exceptions: CRZ-I (Ecologically Sensitive Areas — mangroves, coral reefs, salt marshes, Ramsar sites, sea grass beds, turtle nesting grounds, AND the area between LTL and HTL) is the most protected zone. No new construction is permitted except for projects of the Department of Atomic Energy, defence/strategic projects, trans-harbour sea links, and roads that don’t affect tidal flow. This strict protection is critical for India’s coastal ecology.
📜 UPSC Previous Year Questions (PYQs)
With reference to the “National Action Plan for Climate Change” (NAPCC), which of the following statements is/are correct?
1. It was launched in June 2008 by the National Development Council.
2. One of the missions under it is the “National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture” which, among other things, aims at developing new varieties of drought-resistant crops.
3. “National Water Mission” under it aims to increase water use efficiency by 20%.
Select the correct answer:
✅ Official Answer: (b) 2 and 3 only. Statement 1 is WRONG.
1 ❌ Wrong: NAPCC was launched by the Prime Minister’s Council on Climate Change — NOT the National Development Council (NDC). The PM’s Council on Climate Change is a separate high-level body chaired by the Prime Minister, with ministers, scientists, and industry representatives. The National Development Council is a body for coordinating Five-Year Plans between Centre and States — a different entity. This is a classic UPSC trap testing institutional knowledge. NAPCC was released on June 30, 2008. 2 ✅: The National Mission for Sustainable Agriculture (NMSA) does indeed aim at developing new drought-resistant, flood-tolerant, and pest-resistant crop varieties — as part of adapting Indian agriculture to climate change. It also promotes water use efficiency, soil health management, and integrated farming systems. 3 ✅: The National Water Mission (NWM) has a specific goal of improving water use efficiency by 20% through integrated water resource development and management, demand management, and addressing basin-level water distribution. This 20% efficiency improvement target is a specific, testable fact that UPSC has repeatedly used.
In the context of the ‘Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006’, which of the following statements is/are correct?
1. Forest rights can be given to Scheduled Tribes only.
2. All the rice and other food grain crops can be saved with impunity because forest rights are given.
3. Gram Sabha is empowered to initiate the process for determining the nature and extent of individual or community forest rights to be given to the claimants.
Select the correct answer:
✅ Official Answer: (c) 3 only
1 ❌ Wrong: Forest rights under FRA 2006 are NOT given exclusively to Scheduled Tribes. The Act covers two categories: (a) STs who are traditional forest dwellers, AND (b) “Other Traditional Forest Dwellers” (OTFDs) — non-tribal communities who have been living in forests for at least 3 generations (75 years) before December 13, 2005. Many non-tribal fisherfolk, pastoralists, and settled communities in forests also qualify as OTFDs. So FRA rights extend beyond STs. 2 ❌ Wrong: FRA 2006 grants rights — it does NOT give carte blanche to save any crop “with impunity.” The rights under FRA are specific — to cultivate land already in possession before December 13, 2005, collect Minor Forest Produce, graze in traditional areas, etc. These rights come with responsibilities (not to acquire new land, not to harm forest cover). Crops can only be grown on the specific land for which rights are formally recognised and granted — not anywhere in the forest. 3 ✅: This is the core administrative provision of FRA. The Gram Sabha is empowered to initiate the process for determining the nature and extent of individual or community forest rights. The Gram Sabha examines claims, hears objections, verifies them through its Forest Rights Committee, and forwards recommendations. The Gram Sabha’s role as the initiating and primary authority is what distinguishes FRA from previous forest laws — which were entirely top-down.
❓ Frequently Asked Questions
This is one of the most critical tensions in Indian environmental law and a favourite UPSC Mains topic. The short answer: yes, they are in conflict — and intentionally so. FRA 2006 is based on the principle that: (1) Forest communities have been living in and sustaining forests for generations. (2) Their rights were unjustly denied by colonial and post-colonial laws. (3) Recognising their rights is both a justice issue AND a conservation tool — because empowered communities are the best forest guardians. (4) The Gram Sabha must consent before any forest land can be diverted for any purpose (development, conservation relocation, etc.). FCA 1980 was based on the principle that: Forests must be protected from diversion — especially state governments diverting them for roads, mines, industries. Central government approval mandatory. This is primarily about preventing bureaucratic/political misuse of forest land for economic projects. The FCAA 2023 conflict with FRA: The 2023 Amendment exempts “strategic linear projects within 100 km of international borders” from requiring Central government approval. These projects — roads, railways, power lines — can proceed through forests in border states (NE India, Uttarakhand, HP, Sikkim) WITHOUT: (a) FCA Central approval, and arguably (b) without FRA’s Gram Sabha consent process. Critics say this essentially overrides both FCA AND FRA for these areas — leaving indigenous border communities with no legal protection. The Broader principle: FRA represents decentralised, rights-based governance. FCA/FCAA represents centralised, regulatory governance. When Central government wants to fast-track border infrastructure and exempts itself from both its own regulatory requirements (FCA) AND from community rights requirements (FRA), it creates a serious constitutional governance question — which Parliament and the Courts are still resolving.
Legacy IAS — UPSC Civil Services Coaching, Bangalore |
Sources: MoTA/PIB — FRA implementation data (May 2025: 51.23 lakh claims, 49.02% titles); SC Observer — Wildlife First vs Union of India (FRA constitutionality case, July 2025 update); Sabrang India — SC examines FRA vs Conservation Law (October 30, 2025); Unacademy — Centre Defends FRA 2006 in SC (October 24, 2025); Down to Earth — FRA SC order impacts and implementation (June 2025); Vajiram & Ravi — NGT (September 2024: only 6 judicial members); Sanskriti IAS — NGT challenges and composition; Plutus IAS — NGT overview; Wikipedia — NGT; The Leaflet — CRZ Notification degeneration, NGT larger bench (December 2025); Shankar IAS — CRZ notification; Fortune IAS — CRZ zones; IASbaba — CRZ CRZ-IIIA/B NDZ; Drishti IAS — CRZ 2019; Wikipedia — National Solar Mission (100 GW achieved Jan 31, 2025); Khan Global Studies — India 100 GW solar milestone (Feb 2025); Testbook — NAPCC missions; PMF IAS — NAPCC missions update.
