Environment

In response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by a group of environmental activists, the Supreme Court intervened in a major construction project being developed in a sensitive forest area. The project involved building luxury resorts and commercial facilities, which, according to the developers, had all the necessary approvals from the government. However, the environmental activists argued that the construction posed a serious threat to the biodiversity of the region, including endangered species and the local ecosystem, which had not been adequately assessed.Although no specific environmental protection laws prohibited construction in that particular area, the activists contended that the long-term ecological damage outweighed the economic benefits. After reviewing the case, the Supreme Court ordered an immediate halt to the construction, citing the precautionary principle and potential irreversible harm to the environment.

While the decision protects environmental interests, does it raise concerns about the judiciary intervening in matters typically reserved for the legislature? If the court takes on a proactive role in protecting the environment despite the lack of specific legislation will it be considered judicial activism?