Bihār

Telangāna

Lakshadweep

Tripura

Chhattīsgarh

Uttarākhand

Mahārāshtra

Chandīgarh

Uttar Pradesh

Meghālaya

Dādra and Nagar Haveli and Damān and Diu

West Bengal

Manipur

Delhi

Madhya Pradesh

Mizoram

Gujarāt

Nāgāland

Himāchal Pradesh

Odisha

Haryāna

Punjab

Jhārkhand

Puducherry

Andaman and Nicobar Islands

Jammu and Kashmīr

Rājasthān

Karnātaka

Andhra Pradesh

Sikkim

Kerala

Arunāchal Pradesh

Tamil Nādu

Ladākh

Assam

India

India has committed to increase installed capacity of non-fossil fuel sources to 40% by 2030.

The PM-KUSUM scheme aims to ensure energy security for farmers across India by increasing the installed capacity of electric power from non-fossil fuel sources to 40% by 2030. This is part of India's Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs). There are three main aspects. A. 10,000MW of Decentralized GRound Grid Connected Renewable Power Plants and each plant size up to 2MW. B. Install 17.5 lakh solar powered agriculture pumps and C. Solarisation of 10 Lakh Grid connected agriculture pumps.

Create more carbon sinks by creating more forest and tree cover by 2030. The creation of 2.5-3Bn T of carbon dioxide sinks.

Achieve 40% cumulative electric power installed from non-fossil fuel based sources by 2030

Reducing India's emissions intensity of GDP by 33-35% by 2030 from 2005 level.

The finance minister welcomes a programme for scaling up LED bulbs across households on a widespread level. This will reduce energy usage in India.

In India, sustainable solid waste management systems are to be expanded to every village throught he Swachh Bharat Mission.

In India's Interim Budget 2019-2020, the Finance Minister flagged ten points from the 'Vision for the Decade', which included having a pollution free India with green Mother Earth and Blue skies, improving water management and having a blue economy.

Target of production of 5 million tonnes of Green hydrogen by 2030 and the related development of renewable energy capacity.

Objectives of smart meters mandates by 2017, 2019 against a 2016 baseline

Installed capacity of 20,000 MW by the end of the 13th Five-Year Plan in 2022

To promote programmes for off-grid applications, reaching 1,000MW by 2017 and 2,000MW by 2022

To achieve 15m m2 solar thermal collector area by 2017 and 20m m2 by 2022

To deploy 20m solar lighting systems for rural areas by 2022

Phase Two of the National Solar Mission has a target of 9,000 MW grid-connected and 800MW off-grid solar power by 2017 by 2022

Mandatory percentage of energy from Waste-to-Energy plants by distribution licensees  by 2017 against a 2016 baseline

An indicative target of 20% blending of biofuels, both for bio-diesel and bio-ethanol by 2017

Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand of the Rajasthan High Court published on Order on April 17, 2025, addressing the alarming rise in heatwaves and climate change, emphasizing the life-threatening impact on vulnerable populations. 

The court emphasized the failure of government authorities to implement the Heat Action Plan and other measures to mitigate heatwave effects.​ The court reiterated interim directions, including providing cooling spaces, shaded areas, water facilities, and advisories for outdoor workers. It urged the government to prioritize public welfare, implement the 2015 Prevention of Deaths Due to Heat and Cold Waves Bill, and ensure effective action plans. ​The court demanded immediate compliance from authorities, primarily based on the right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. ​

In an effort to impede the proposed cutting down of 2057 trees in Dehradun in order to widen the road, the Petitioner filed a writ petition in the public interest. The petitioner claims that the respondents were determined to take down fully grown trees rather than remove encroachments, stalls, electric polls, transformers, tankers and vehicle parking that is not planned, hawkers and squatters, and the encroachment of walking spaces. Additionally, the petitioner requested that the respondents provide guidelines for any road widening project that would require the subsequent felling of trees. 
The petitioner’s stay application was dismissed by the Court, enabling the State to press forward with the road widening project. Nonetheless, the State was directed to abide by the conditions and directions set forth by the Court. The Court took into consideration the significance of sustainable development and striking a balance between development and environmental needs. Although it recognized the effects of tree-cutting, it concluded that the amount of forest cover in the area did not put the species of birds and insects at risk. The court additionally noted that the road's development and widening were urgently needed owing to the heavy traffic and would have possible advantages in terms of improved traffic flow and lower carbon emissions.

The present case is a writ Petition was filed to the Supreme Court of India, invoking its jurisdiction and to issue the necessary order to protect two endangered birds, the Great Indian Bustard (GIB) and Lesser Florican. This petition was in reference the judgment of the Supreme Court dated 19th April, 2021 wherein the Supreme Court had ordered that a large part of the territory not be used for overhead transmission lines, gave instructions to convert to underground power lines within a year and appointed a committee to determine whether laying high voltage underground power lines would be feasible. The Ministry of Environment, Forests, and Climate Change, the Ministry of Power, and the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (‘MNRE’) requested a modification of the judgement dated 19th April, 2021, on the grounds that the implementation of the said judgment would cause adverse implications for the power sector and India’s International commitment for energy transition and fulfilment of promise under the Paris agreement signed by India in 2015 under the United Nations Framework Conventions on Climate Change[UNFCC]. In the present case the Apex Court had to decide two major issues i.e. modification of the directions issued under the earlier judgment dated 19th April, 2019 and to balance the preservation of Great Indian Bustard and India’s commitment to control climate change through just transition [ shifting from energy from fossil fuels to renewable energy]. The Apex court reviewed the factors causing threats to Great Indian Bustards, the actions taken by the Government of India, specifically the programme ‘Habitat Improvement and Conservation breeding of Great Indian Bustard’ launched in 2016 and other measures. The Court also discussed the impacts of changing climate and India’s commitments and efforts to control it. It was observed that promotion of renewable energy sources is crucial for promoting social equity by ensuring access to clean and affordable energy for all segments of society and thus fostering inclusive growth and development across the nation. The Court emphasised on the duty on the part of the State under Article 48 A and fundamental duty of citizens under Article 51 A of the constitution of India as constitutional commitments to ensure protection of natural world and compassion for living creatures. Relating these duties to Articles 21 and 14 of the Indian Constitution, the Court declared that the right to clean environment and right against the adverse effects of climate change has its source in Article 21 which recognises the right to life and personal liberty and article 14 which indicates equality before law and equal protection of law. Thus, justifying the actions of the State, the court dealt with intersection between climate change and human rights as well as a novel issue of intricate interface between the conservation of an endangered species, such as the Great Indian Bustard and the imperative of protecting against the climate change.

The Supreme Court noted the need to balance the interests of conserving the GIB with India's commitment to reduce emissions and move away from fossil fuel-based energy resources. By an order dated 21 March 2024, the SC restricted the undergrounding requirement under the 2021 Order to only the priority GIB areas (approximately 13,163 square kilometers), subject to feasibility to be determined by an expanded seven-member expert committee. The Supreme Courtalso modified the 2021 Order by easing the restrictions imposed by the 2021 Order in the potential GIB areas

The case centers on the validity of an exemption notification issued on September 24, 2015, which exempted 62 to 63 species of trees and plants from the regulatory provisions of the Transit Rules, 2000. The notification was challenged on the grounds that it was beyond the authority granted by the Forest Act of 1927 and violated Articles 14, 21, and 48-A of the Constitution of India.

The State of Madhya Pradesh issued a notification that exempted several species of forest produce from regulatory control. This notification was later amended to include additional species. As a result, concerns arose about large-scale deforestation and the illegal trading of timber, which were intensified by these exemptions. The court reviewed internal correspondence and inquiry reports that highlighted the negative impact of these exemptions on climate change and biodiversity of Madhya Pradesh.

The main issue was the validity and constitutionality of the exemption notification and its subsequent amendments. The court also examined the environmental impact of these exemptions, especially regarding climate change. It evaluated whether the exemptions were justified by compelling reasons, backed by data, research, and surveys. Furthermore, the court considered the necessity of periodic reviews and assessments of the exemptions to ensure they do not contribute to environmental degradation.

In doing so, the court quashed the exemption notification dated 24.09.2015 and its subsequent amendments, declaring them ultra vires the provisions of Secs. ​ 41(1), (2) & (3) of the Forest Act, 1927, and violative of Articles 14, 21, and 48-A of the Constitution of India. ​ The court found that the notification was issued without any independent background research, surveys, or empirical studies to demonstrate the compelling circumstances for exempting such a large number of species. ​ The annulment of the impugned notification revived the applicability of Transit Pass Rules, 2000 to all the previously exempted species. ​ The court emphasized that the regulatory measures under Sec. ​ 41(2) of the Forest Act are a norm, and the power to exempt under Sec. ​ 41(3) is an exception that must be exercised sparingly and with compelling reasons. ​

The judgment addresses the existential threat posed by climate change and underscores the critical role that forests play in mitigating its harmful effects. It points out the connection between fundamental rights and environmental issues, asserting that the right to a healthy environment is inherent in the right to life as stated in Article 21. The court mandates that judicial reviews of legislative actions or subordinate legislation must prioritize environmental protection and sustainable development, in line with both national and international commitments to combat climate change. The ruling highlights the importance of implementing regulatory measures to safeguard forests and natural resources, ensuring that any exemptions do not contribute to further environmental degradation. 

Geography

India

Recent cases