CURRENT AFFAIRS | 28 APRIL 2026
CLAT GK + ENVIRONMENTAL LAW & ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
The Maharashtra Environment and Climate Change Department, under BJP Minister Pankaja Munde, has cancelled administrative approval for 14 lake conservation projects sanctioned under the State Lake Conservation Plan (SLCP), reports the Indian Express on its front page today (28 April 2026, by Alok Deshpande). The total sanctioned cost was ₹244.15 crore; ₹73.31 crore has already been released and the government has ordered recovery with interest. Eleven of the 14 were cleared during Eknath Shinde’s tenure as Chief Minister; three were cleared earlier when Shiv Sena (UBT) MLA Aaditya Thackeray held the Environment portfolio in the MVA government.
The lakes affected span six districts: Mukteshwar, Samatanagar and Aussa (Latur); Vadap (Karjat); Parampam and Beloshi (Alibaug, Raigad); Kalmadu, Visapur, Devli and Brahmanshevage (Chalisgaon); plus Ozar-Lanja (Ratnagiri), Erangal (Mumbai) and Khambale (Igatpuri). The official reason cited: project Detailed Project Reports (DPRs) were not in the prescribed format and SLCP guidelines were violated. The cancellation is the latest in a series of reversals by the Devendra Fadnavis government undoing Shinde-era decisions.
⚖️ Constitutional & Legal Framework
- Article 48A (DPSP) — State duty to protect and improve the environment and safeguard forests and wildlife.
- Article 51A(g) (Fundamental Duty) — citizen duty to protect environment including lakes and rivers.
- Article 21 — right to clean and healthy environment, recognised in Subhash Kumar v State of Bihar (1991) and the M.C. Mehta line.
- Public Trust Doctrine — M.C. Mehta v Kamal Nath, (1997) 1 SCC 388 — natural resources including lakes are held by the State in trust for the public; commercial diversion violates the trust.
- Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017 — notified under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986; created State Wetland Authorities and a National Wetland Committee.
- Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 — umbrella legislation; SLCP guidelines flow from this and the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974.
- Article 243 + Eleventh Schedule (Item 11, drinking water; Item 6, minor irrigation, watershed development) + Twelfth Schedule (Item 8, urban environment) — constitutional anchor for PRI/ULB role in lake management.
- Ramsar Convention, 1971 — India a party since 1982; 80+ Indian Ramsar sites including Maharashtra’s Lonar Lake (notified 13 Nov 2020).
- Administrative law — revocation of executive sanction for non-compliance with statutory preconditions; subject to natural justice (Article 14 + Maneka Gandhi (1978)).
📚 Why This Matters for CLAT 2027
This is a high-yield Legal Reasoning passage: the facts squarely raise the Public Trust Doctrine from M.C. Mehta v Kamal Nath — natural resources are held in trust and cannot be wantonly transferred or wasted. Expect questions on (i) whether revoking a sanction without hearing the implementing agencies violates Article 14 / natural justice (audi alteram partem), (ii) whether project cancellation that furthers environmental protection can be challenged at all (proportionality), (iii) the federal architecture: who has primary jurisdiction over wetlands — the Centre under EPA 1986, the State under SLCP, or local bodies under Schedule XI/XII. Cross-reference Lonar Lake (Ramsar 2020), Sukhna Lake (Chandigarh — NGT orders), and the Bellandur lake fires (Bengaluru) for comparator passages. Also revise the polluter pays principle (Vellore Citizens, 1996) and the precautionary principle.
📊 Key Facts at a Glance
| Element | Detail |
|---|---|
| Action | 14 lake conservation projects cancelled, April 2026 |
| Authority | Maharashtra Env & Climate Change Dept; Minister Pankaja Munde (BJP) |
| Total cost | ₹244.15 crore sanctioned |
| Disbursed (recovery ordered) | ₹73.31 crore |
| Districts affected | Latur, Raigad, Jalgaon (Chalisgaon), Ratnagiri, Mumbai, Nashik (Igatpuri) |
| Scheme | State Lake Conservation Plan (SLCP), since 2006-07 |
| Reason cited | DPRs not in prescribed format; SLCP guidelines violated |
| Political backdrop | 11 cleared under Shinde; 3 earlier under Aaditya Thackeray (MVA) |
| Constitutional anchor | Articles 48A, 51A(g), 21; M.C. Mehta v Kamal Nath (1997) |
| Relevant Rules | Wetlands (Conservation & Management) Rules, 2017 |
🧠 Memory Hook
’48A-51A(g)-21′ — India’s environmental constitution: State duty + Citizen duty + Right to life = the three-legged stool every environmental case rests on.
‘M-V-I-S’ — four landmark environmental judgments to remember: M.C. Mehta v Kamal Nath (Public Trust, 1997); Vellore Citizens (Polluter Pays + Precautionary, 1996); Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action (Bichhri case, 1996); Subhash Kumar (clean environment under Art 21, 1991).
The Larger Pattern
The cancellation fits into a broader Fadnavis-government rollback of Shinde-era and MVA-era decisions — earlier in April the One State One Uniform school policy and the three-course mid-day meal tweak were also undone. From an administrative-law standpoint, the question is whether the cancellation itself follows due process: the implementing agencies (largely municipal councils and ZPs) ought to have been heard before recovery orders were issued. From an environmental standpoint, the cancellations may actually be welcome if the DPRs were genuinely non-compliant — desilting projects done badly can damage rather than restore lake ecology. CLAT 2027 candidates should track three things: any judicial challenge filed by affected municipalities under Article 226, the Maharashtra government’s revised SLCP guidelines (expected by July), and whether the Wetlands Authority of Maharashtra (set up under the 2017 Rules) takes a fresh, science-led look at each lake before re-sanctioning any project.
Practice Quiz — 10 CLAT-Style Questions
Click an option to reveal the answer and explanation.
