Supreme Court Shields Endangered Bustard, Allows Regulated Green Energy Push

The Supreme Court has delivered a significant judgment addressing the conflict between the conservation of the critically endangered Great Indian Bustard (GIB) and the expansion of renewable energy infrastructure in its natural habitats across Rajasthan and Gujarat.

The Court examined how to reconcile the urgent need to prevent the extinction of the GIB and the Lesser Florican with India’s international obligations to combat climate change through a rapid transition to renewable energy, particularly in the Thar Desert region, which holds substantial solar and wind potential.

The case originated in 2019, when a writ petition was filed before the Supreme Court seeking immediate conservation measures for the GIB, highlighting high mortality rates caused by collisions with overhead power transmission lines. Responding to the concern, the Court in April 2021 passed an interim order imposing a broad ban on new overhead transmission lines and directing the undergrounding of existing power lines across nearly 99,000 square kilometres of the bird’s habitat.

Subsequently, the Union government and renewable energy developers approached the Court seeking modification of the 2021 order, arguing that large-scale undergrounding of transmission lines was technically infeasible, economically prohibitive, and would significantly hinder India’s renewable energy expansion plans.

Taking note of these concerns, the Supreme Court in March 2024 modified its earlier order and constituted an Expert Committee to recommend a scientifically balanced approach that would harmonise wildlife conservation with sustainable development. The Committee submitted separate reports for Rajasthan and Gujarat in 2024.

After examining the Expert Committee’s recommendations and considering submissions from conservation groups, renewable energy companies, and government authorities, the Court finalised revised priority conservation areas. In Rajasthan, the revised priority area was fixed at 14,013 square kilometres, an increase from the earlier 13,163 square kilometres, while in Gujarat, the revised priority area was fixed at 740 square kilometres.

The Court imposed strict restrictions on new renewable energy projects within these revised priority areas. It prohibited the installation of new wind turbines and barred the development of new solar parks or solar plants with capacities exceeding 2 MW. However, small-scale solar projects of up to 2 MW were permitted solely to meet local community requirements. The Court also disallowed any expansion of existing solar parks within these zones.

Further, the Court ruled that no new overhead power transmission lines would be allowed in the priority areas, except for local distribution lines of 11 kV and below. Any future high-voltage transmission lines, if unavoidable, must pass only through dedicated power line corridors identified by the Expert Committee.

Addressing the risk posed by existing transmission infrastructure, the Court directed that all power lines within the priority areas must be mitigated. Certain stretches identified by the Expert Committee, including around 80 kilometres of 33 kV lines in Rajasthan and specific 66 kV lines in Gujarat, were ordered to be undergrounded immediately.

For other lines, the Court permitted mitigation through undergrounding, rerouting outside the priority areas, or the use of insulated cables. All such mitigation measures must be completed within two years, by December 2027.

The Court also emphasised the need to optimise power line planning outside the priority areas, directing that new transmission lines should, as far as possible, share common routes and corridors to minimise habitat fragmentation.

On the issue of bird flight diverters, the Court declined to mandate their widespread installation, accepting the Expert Committee’s view that their effectiveness for bustards remains unproven and that they involve high maintenance costs. The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change was directed to oversee further scientific studies on the effectiveness of bird flight diverters and to take appropriate action based on the findings.

The judgment further ordered the immediate implementation of in-situ and ex-situ conservation measures recommended by the Expert Committee, including habitat restoration, predator management, and community engagement initiatives. The Court also underscored the importance of long-term research on the impact of climate change on the Great Indian Bustard.

In a significant observation, the Supreme Court stated that Corporate Social Responsibility must inherently include environmental responsibility. It held that companies, particularly non-renewable power generators operating in the region, have a duty to contribute to species recovery efforts, in line with the polluter pays principle and the fundamental duty to protect the environment under Article 51A(g) of the Constitution.

All connected civil appeals and writ petitions were disposed of in accordance with these directions. The Court adopted a middle path by moving away from a blanket ban on infrastructure development and endorsing a science-based, area-specific approach. While the judgment prioritises the protection of core GIB habitats from further large-scale renewable energy projects, it allows regulated renewable energy development outside these zones and mandates the retrofitting of existing infrastructure within a strict two-year timeline, placing the responsibility for implementation on government authorities led by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change.