Power of Central Government to take measures to protect and improve environment
Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 deals with power of Central Government to take measures to protect and improve environment. Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Central Government shall have the power to take all such measures as it deems necessary or expedient for the purpose of protecting and improving the quality of the environment and preventing, controlling and abating environmental pollution. The Act came into force on 19 Nov 1986.
(1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Central Government shall have the power to take all such measures as it deems necessary or expedient for the purpose of protecting and improving the quality of the environment and preventing, controlling and abating environmental pollution.
(2) In particular, and without prejudice to the generality of the provisions of sub-section (1), such measures may include measures with respect to all or any of the following matters, namely:--
(i) co-ordination of actions by the State Governments, officers and other authorities--
(a) under this Act, or the rules made thereunder; or
(b) under any other law for the time being in force which is relatable to the objects of this Act;
(ii) planning and execution of a nation-wide programme for the prevention, control and abatement of environmental pollution;
(iii) laying down standards for the quality of environment in its various aspects;
(iv) laying down standards for emission or discharge of environmental pollutants from various sources whatsoever:
Provided that different standards for emission or discharge may be laid down under this clause from different sources having regard to the quality or composition of the emission or discharge of environmental pollutants from such sources;
(v) restriction of areas in which any industries, operations or processes or class of industries, operations or processes shall not be carried out or shall be carried out subject to certain safeguards;
(vi) laying down procedures and safeguards for the prevention of accidents which may cause environmental pollution and remedial measures for such accidents;
(vii) laying down procedures and safeguards for the handling of hazardous substances;
(viii) examination of such manufacturing processes, materials and substances as are likely to cause environmental pollution;
(ix) carrying out and sponsoring investigations and research relating to problems of environmental pollution;
(x) inspection of any premises, plant, equipment, machinery, manufacturing or other processes, materials or substances and giving, by order, of such directions to such authorities, officers or persons as it may consider necessary to take steps for the prevention, control and abatement of environmental pollution;
(xi) establishment or recognition of environmental laboratories and institutes to carry out the functions entrusted to such environmental laboratories and institutes under this Act;
(xii) collection and dissemination of information in respect of matters relating to environmental pollution;
(xiii) preparation of manuals, codes or guides relating to the prevention, control and abatement of environmental pollution;
(xiv) such other matters as the Central Government deems necessary or expedient for the purpose of securing the effective implementation of the provisions of this Act.
(3) The Central Government may, if it considers it necessary or expedient so to do for the purposes of this Act, by order, published in the Official Gazette, constitute an authority or authorities by such name or names as may be specified in the order for the purpose of exercising and performing such of the powers and functions (including the power to issue directions under section 5) of the Central Government under this Act and for taking measures with respect to such of the matters referred to in sub-section (2) as may be mentioned in the order and subject to the supervision and control of the Central Government and the provisions of such order, such authority or authorities may exercise the powers or perform the functions or take the measures so mentioned in the order as if such authority or authorities had been empowered by this Act to exercise those powers or perform those functions or take such measures.
Section 3, The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (Act 29 of 1986).
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
This section refers to
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
To protect the Great Indian Bustard, the Court directed restrictions on overhead power lines in priority GIB habitat, reading WLPA s.9 (prohibition of hunting/killing of a scheduled species) with Environment (Protection) Act s.3 measures and Articles 21, 48A and 51A(g). Teaching file is the 19 April 2021 Judgement (order-8.pdf), not later 2024 modification order-19.pdf and not same-date order-7 ROP.
On this section: EPA s.3 measures support Court directions to restrict overhead lines in GIB priority habitat.
-
Alembic Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Rohit Prajapati
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Ex post facto environmental clearances are illegal. Industry that operated without prior EC is liable on polluter-pays principles under Environment (Protection) Act s.3 measures and s.15 penalties, read with Article 21. Use Judgement order-32.pdf (2020-04-01), not same-date order-33 ROP.
On this section: EPA s.3 does not authorise ex post facto environmental clearance; prior EC is the rule.
-
Keystone Realtors Pvt. Ltd. v. Anil V. Tharthare
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
REPORTABLE Chandrachud J., 3 Dec 2019, CA 2435/2019. Use Judgement order-5.pdf, not same-date order-6 ROP. MCP flagged WRONG DOCUMENT but the body is this reportable EIA judgment (some secondary sources wrongly give 2021). Expansion of a building project still within the same EIA Notification Schedule entry requires a fresh Form 1 / SEAC appraisal under para 7(ii); an amendment of an existing EC is not a substitute where there is a change in the built-up area / environmental parameters. EPA s.3 and the EIA Notification are the source of that duty; Articles 21 and 48A inform the standard.
On this section: EPA s.3 / EIA Notification para 7(ii): expansion still within the same Schedule entry requires a fresh Form 1 and SEAC appraisal, not a mere EC amendment.
-
Hanuman Laxman Aroskar v. Union of India
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Environmental clearance for the Goa Mopa airport was set aside because the EIA/EC process under Environment (Protection) Act s.3 and related EIA Notification duties was not a reasoned, full-disclosure exercise. Public participation and the duty to give reasons are part of environmental rule of law under Articles 21 and 48A. Use Judgement order-10.pdf (2019-03-29), not same-date order-9 ROP.
On this section: Central measures / EC process under EPA s.3 and the EIA Notification must be a reasoned, full-disclosure exercise; Mopa airport EC failed that standard.
-
Vanashakti vs Union Of India
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The prior environmental clearance regime under the 2006 Notification is mandatory and gives expression to the precautionary principle. While breach of this regime attracts civil penalties under Section 15 of the 1986 Act and by necessary implication leads to restoration of status quo ante including closure, demolition, remediation and recovery of costs, the Central Government possesses power under Section 3 of the 1986 Act to issue a narrowly tailored, time-bound, delegated legislation carving an exception to the prior EC requirement in appropriate cases where a supervening public interest justifies controlled continuance subject to stringent appraisal, damage assessment, remediation, compensatory liability and future compliance. Such an exception must satisfy the constitutional tests of reasonable classification under Article 14 and proportionality under Article 21. However, an administrative instruction cannot supplant the 2006 Notification or create a perpetual amnesty regime applicable to all permissible projects without intelligible differentia bearing rational nexus to supervening public interest. The 2017 Notification is valid as such a narrowly tailored exception, but the 2021 Office Memorandum is invalid as it fails the proportionality test by being unlimited in time and class.
On this section: Confers power on Central Government to take measures necessary for protecting and improving quality of environment and preventing, controlling and abating environmental pollution
-
Gulf Goans Hotels Co. Ltd. vs Union of India
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Executive guidelines on environmental protection, even if based on international commitments and constitutional values, cannot be enforced as law against citizens unless they: (1) are properly authenticated under Article 77 of the Constitution (expressed in President's name and authenticated as prescribed by Rules); (2) are published in the official gazette; (3) contain clear, unambiguous, unequivocal mandate with prescriptive force; and (4) have statutory backing. Guidelines that remain mere suggestions or opinions in exploring correct parameters, lacking these essential elements of law, cannot bind citizens or justify enforcement actions like demolition orders. The doctrine of incorporation of international law into municipal law does not permit implementation of international commitments through unauthenticated executive guidelines when specific parameters are not internationally agreed upon. Statutory enactment through proper legislative process is required to give binding effect to environmental protection measures affecting property rights.
On this section: Central Government power to pass orders and issue directions; Court held these sections require statutory parameters to be determined, not merely guidelines
-
M/s Indian Oil Corporation Limited vs V.B.R. Menon
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
While the National Green Tribunal possesses the jurisdiction and power to direct the Central Pollution Control Board to exercise its statutory authority under Section 5 of the Environment Protection Act, 1986 for environmental protection purposes, the requirement to obtain Consent To Establish and Consent To Operate for petroleum retail outlets is neither necessary nor reasonable when comprehensive guidelines issued by the CPCB addressing all environmental safeguards are scrupulously adhered to and enforced. The Court may modify NGT's direction when implementation would impose disproportionate burdens without corresponding environmental benefit, substituting guidance ensuring strict adherence to sectoral guidelines with enforcement against breaches through established legal mechanisms.
On this section: Central Government or delegate empowered to take all measures necessary or expedient for protecting and improving quality of environment
-
Forum, Prevention of Envn&sound Pollution vs Union of India
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A limited power of exemption from night-time loudspeaker restrictions granted to State Governments for cultural and religious occasions (maximum 15 days per year, 2 hours duration from 10 PM to 12 midnight) is constitutionally valid under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution as a reasonable restriction in public interest, provided that: (1) the power is exercised at State level without further delegation; (2) exemption dates are specified in advance to prevent arbitrariness; (3) the scope of exemption is not widened by increasing days or duration; (4) exemption does not apply to silence zone areas; and (5) noise levels do not exceed prescribed decibel limits. Any widening of the exemption scope would render the rule unconstitutional.
On this section: Constitutional basis for Central Government's power to frame Noise Pollution Rules; authority to regulate environmental protection and noise pollution control
-
Essar Oil LTD vs Halar Utkarsh Samiti
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Section 29 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 does not impose an absolute prohibition on all activities in sanctuaries. The prohibition on destruction, exploitation or removal of wildlife (prohibition a) requires State Government satisfaction that such activity is necessary for improvement and better management of wildlife. However, for activities affecting habitat (prohibitions b and c), the State need only ensure that the habitat is sustained and damage does not result in wildlife destruction. Laying pipelines through a sanctuary does not necessarily constitute destruction of wildlife but is a question of fact to be determined by experts. If the damage is reversible and minimal, and proper environmental safeguards, expert consultation, environmental impact assessment, environmental management plan, and compliance monitoring are in place, the State Government may grant permission for such activities. The Court will not substitute its assessment for that of qualified experts, but will oversee that experts with established credentials have been consulted and their recommendations abided by.
On this section: Empowers Central Government to declare Coastal Regulation Zones
-
Sheikh Ikram Sheikh Israil vs State of Maharashtra
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a long-established business in a residential area faces cessation orders due to noise pollution complaints arising from subsequently opened nearby institutions, the appropriate remedy is not immediate shutdown but rather to provide the business operator a reasonable opportunity to propose and implement remedial measures to comply with ambient air quality standards, while simultaneously considering feasibility of alternative site relocation, with interim protection maintained during this remedial period.
On this section: Authority under which Noise Pollution Regulation and Control Rules 2000 were framed; provides framework for environmental protection and regulation of noise pollution
-
People United for Better Living in Calcutta (PUBLIC) v. State of West Bengal
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
DB (Sivagnanam CJ + Hiranmay Bhattacharyya J.), REPORTABLE Final Order DATE VERIFIED 2024-06-20 order-6.pdf. PIL to stop Joka–Esplanade underground metro / Victoria station in the Maidan over transplantation of trees. Court applied Godavarman (2022) 4 SCC 289 precautionary principle and sustainable development: public-interest metro must be balanced with ecology. RVNL had obtained Defence / Forest permissions for transplantation/felling (29 trees in the Victoria plot, compensatory plantation). Permissions not arbitrary. PIL dismissed; interim orders vacated; RVNL permitted to proceed. Art 48A duty is real but does not freeze a sanctioned underground alignment. Earlier APDR/Subhas Datta Calcutta hits were infructuous/delay dismissals and were not used.
On this section: Central EPA s.3 / Godavarman sustainable-development frame was applied to the Maidan metro; Forest/Defence permissions for 29 trees were held not arbitrary.
-
Numaligarh Refinery Ltd. v. Union of India
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Justice Devashis Baruah (Final Order, DATE VERIFIED 2024-02-08 order-15.pdf; do not use order-16 IA closure). NGT's 24.08.2016 judgment and 03.08.2018 review had become final after the Supreme Court dismissed CA 41203/2018. Article 226 cannot be used as a further appeal over a concluded NGT order on the Deopahar / Numaligarh elephant corridor, 1996 no-development zone and Godavarman forest-cover line. Assam Forest Regulation 1891 (not Indian Forest Act 1927) was the local forest statute; do not map IFA 1927. Gauhati isolated. Numaligarh leftover retry succeeded on a labelled Final Order.
On this section: Central EPA s.3 / NDZ / Godavarman forest-cover measures were the environmental frame of the NGT order that had become final; the HC refused to reopen them on 226.
-
Mohd. Salim v. State of Uttarakhand
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Rivers Ganga and Yamuna (and their tributaries) are declared living / juristic persons, with the State as loco parentis, so that pollution and encroachment can be restrained as injury to a legal person. Articles 21, 48A and 51A(g) read with Environment (Protection) Act powers support the declaration. Later stayed by the Supreme Court (SLP) — teach the HC holding against that later stay.
On this section: Central/State environmental measures under EPA s.3 sit alongside the HC's loco parentis directions for Ganga/Yamuna.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… In paragraph 21 this Court held thus: "21. The omission in the appeal to make any attempt to sustain the Circular dated 14-5-2002 with reference to the provisions of Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 is significant. For an action of the Central Government to be treated as a measure referable to Section 3 it must satisfy the statutory requirement of being necessary or expedient "for the purpose of protecting and improving the quality of the environment and preventing, …
-
… District Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority: (I) A District Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority hereinafter referred to as the DEIAA shall be constituted by the Central Government under sub-section (3) of section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 comprising of four members including a Chairperson and a Member-Secretary. (2) The District Magistrate or District Collector shall be the Chairperson of the DEIAA. (3) The Sub-Divisional Magistrate or Sub-Divisional Officer of the district head quarter of the …
-
… It is also apposite to state that while polluters bear absolute liability to compensate for environmental damage, the Governments (both Union and State) share an equally significant responsibility to prevent environmental degradation and ensure the implementation of effective remedial action. Moreover, Sections 3 and 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, empower the Central Government to issue directions. Thus, the Central Government, with the assistance of the State Government, RPCB or any other agency or authority, authorized, empowered or constituted by it, if so required, is entrusted with determining the amount …
Made under this section, and citing it
40 instruments state that it was made under this provision — the power to make it comes from here, so a change to any of them changes what this section requires in practice. Newest first.
- Plastic Waste Management (Amendment) Rules, 2026Rule 2026
- S.O. 109(E)Rajauli (Nawada) Wildlife Sanctuary, BiharNotification 2026
- S.O. 119(E) Lippa Asrang WLS Himachal PradeshNotification 2026
- S.O. 119(E), Lippa-Asrang Wildlife Sanctuary, Himachal PradeshNotification 2026
- S.O. 238 (E) Kumbalgarh WLS RajasthanNotification 2026
- S.O. No. 401 Jaldapara National Park West BengalNotification 2026
- S.O. No. 84(E) Final Kaimur WLS Uttar PradeshNotification 2026
- Solid Waste Management Rules, 2026Rule 2026
- Amendment: Bandhavgarh Tiger Reserve (2 PAs) (Madhya Pradesh) S.O. No. 288(E)Notification 2025
- Amendment: Bhindawas Wildlife Sanctuary (Haryana) S.O. No. 191(E)Notification 2025
- Amendment: Bir Dosanjh Wildlife Sanctuary (Punjab) S.O. No. 150(E)Notification 2025
- Amendment: Gangewadi Great Indian Bustard Wildlife Sanctuary (Maharashtra) S.O. No. 324(E)Notification 2025
- Amendment: Ghataprabha Wildlife Sanctuary (Karnataka) S.O. No. 491(E)Notification 2025
- Amendment: Ghatigaon Hukna Wildlife Sanctuary (Madhya Pradesh) S.O. No. 597(E)Notification 2025
- Amendment: Khangchendzonga National Park (Sikkim) S.O. No. 239(E)Notification 2025
- Amendment: Khol Hi Raitan Wildlife Sanctuary (Haryana) S.O. No. 148(E)Notification 2025
- Amendment: Kinnersani Wildlife Sanctuary (Telangana) S.O. No. 290(E)Notification 2025
- Amendment: Kyongnosla Alpine Wildlife Sanctuary (Sikkim) S.O. No. 316(E)Notification 2025
- Amendment: Maenam Wildlife Sanctuary (Sikkim) S.O. No. 445 (E)Notification 2025
- Amendment: Melukote Wildlife Sanctuary (Karnataka) S.O. No. 115(E)Notification 2025
- Amendment: Pakhal Wildlife Sanctuary (Telangana) S.O. No. 443(E)Notification 2025
- Amendment: Pangolakha Wildlife Sanctuary (Sikkim) S.O. No. 100 (E)Notification 2025
- Amendment: Pushpagiri Wildlife Sanctuary (Karnataka) S.O. No. 556(E)Notification 2025
- Amendment: Shingba Rhododendron Wildlife Sanctuary (Sikkim) S.O. No. 621 (E)Notification 2025
- Battery Waste Management (Amendment) Rules, 2025Rule 2025
- Environment Protection (End-of-Life Vehicles) Rules, 2025Rule 2025
- Plastic Waste Management (Amendment) Rules, 2025Rule 2025
- S. O. 1111(E) 10.03.2025 Final Notification declaring Eco Sensitive Zone around Bhoramdeo WLS, ChattisgarhNotification 2025
- S. O. 2356(E) 25.05.2025 Final Notification declaring Eco Sensitive Zone around Tral WLS, Jammu and KashmirNotification 2025
- S. O. 3136(E) 14.05.2025 Final Notification declaring Eco Sensitive Zone around Haliday Island Sanctuary, West BengalNotification 2025
- S. O. 4685(E) 15.10.2025 Final Notification declaring Eco Sensitive Zone around Rupi Bhaba WLS, Himachal PradeshNotification 2025
- S.O. 191(E)Notification 2025
- S.O. 3401 (E) Environment Protection (Management of Contaminated Sites) Rules, 2025Rule 2025
- S.O. Shergarh Wildlife Sanctuary Final Notification ESZ aroundNotification 2025
- SO 134 (E) dated 07-01-2025-Reconstitution of SEIAA-SEAC Madhya PradeshNotification 2025
- SO 135 (E) dated 07-01-2025-Reconstitution of SEIAA SEAC ChhatisgarhNotification 2025
- SO 149 (E) dated 08-01-2025-Amendment in Reconstitution of SEIAA-SEAC Tamil NaduNotification 2025
- SO 155(E) dated 09-01-2025-Amendment in Reconstitution of SEIAA SEAC MaharashtraNotification 2025
- Amendment Notification Declaring Eco Sensitive Zone S.O. No. 2629(E) Shimla Water Catchment Wildlife Sanctaury, Himachal PradeshNotification 2024
- Amendment Notification Declaring Eco Sensitive Zone S.O. No. 2630(E) Jaldapara National Park, West BengalNotification 2024
Questions about Section 3
What have the courts held on Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act?
M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India (19 Apr 2021) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: EPA s.3 measures support Court directions to restrict overhead lines in GIB priority habitat. Another 12 judgments on this section are set out below, 10 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2004 to 2026.
How do I find court cases under Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: Environment Act 3, section 3 Environment Act, section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 13 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India (19 Apr 2021).
What should I read with Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 5 (Power to give directions), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 4 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. The rules and notifications made under it are where it actually bites, and there are 40: most recently Plastic Waste Management (Amendment) Rules, 2026 (2026), then S.O. 109(E)Rajauli (Nawada) Wildlife Sanctuary, Bihar (2026), and 38 more.
When did Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act come into force?
Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, commonly called environmental clearance, and cited as Environment Act 3, came into force on 19 Nov 1986, having been enacted on 23 May 1986. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 25. Power to make rules447 words
- 11. Power to take sample and procedure to be followed in connection therewith420 words
- 15C. Adjudicating officer379 words
- 10. Powers of entry and inspection369 words
- 15F. Offence for failure to pay penalty or additional penalty310 words
- 9. Furnishing of information to authorities and agencies in certain cases241 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 14 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.