Resources › CA MCQ Practice
29 Jul 2026ENVIRONMENT3 questions

No Amnesty by Memo: The Supreme Court Shuts the Executive Route to Retrospective Green Clearances

UPSC-standard MCQs with explanations, trap analysis, and approach guide. Answer after the test — not before.

1

Easy

1

Medium

1

Hard

Practice this set

3 questions · full analysis after submission · no sign-up required

Article summary

The Supreme Court on 29 July 2026 quashed, with prospective effect, the Union government's 2021 Office Memorandum that had created a standing procedure to grant ex post facto — retrospective — environmental clearance to projects begun or completed without the prior clearance the law requires. The Court held that the mandatory regime of prior environmental clearance, rooted in the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and the precautionary principle, cannot be diluted by a mere administrative instruction such as an Office Memorandum. It nonetheless declined to shut the door entirely: the government may, in exceptional circumstances and in public interest, provide for such clearances, but only through a statutory notification issued under its delegated powers under the 1986 Act, not through an executive order. The ruling therefore turns on the instrument — statute or memo — rather than on an absolute prohibition, and is significant for the balance between environmental regulation and development.

What this tests

recallTests whether you read the article and retained key facts.
1Q
applicationTests whether you can apply the concept to a new scenario.
1Q
analysisTests whether you can reason across multiple related facts.
1Q

Sample questions — answers revealed after test

ENVIRONMENTRecallEasy

Q1. The requirement of prior environmental clearance for certain projects in India flows chiefly from which of the following?

AThe Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.
BThe Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification, 2006 issued under it.
CThe Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.
DThe Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974.
Answer revealed after you submit the test
ENVIRONMENTApplicationMedium

Q2. The Court held that an Office Memorandum could not authorise post-facto clearance. Which administrative-law principle best captures the core of that holding?

AThat the executive may amend any statutory requirement through internal instructions if the purpose is benevolent.
BThat a mandatory requirement created by a statutory regime cannot be diluted or overridden by a subordinate executive instrument such as an Office Memorandum.
CThat environmental clearance is never required for any project.
DThat courts cannot review executive memoranda at all.
Answer revealed after you submit the test
ENVIRONMENTAnalysisHard

Q3. Consider the following statements about post-facto environmental clearance: 1. The logic of environmental impact assessment is to prevent harm before a project proceeds, which is why prior clearance is the norm. 2. Post-facto clearance reverses that logic by regularising a project already built. 3. The Court's ruling means that retrospective clearance can never be granted under any circumstances or by any legal instrument. Which of the statements given above are correct?

A1 and 2 only
B1 only
C2 and 3 only
D1, 2 and 3
Answer revealed after you submit the test