Supreme Court to examine if law is diluting India's wetland count

📌 Summary:

• Supreme Court Bench headed by CJI Surya Kant on May 26, 2026 issued formal notice to the Union Government on a constitutional challenge to the definition of "wetlands" in Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017

• Petitioners (environmental activists led by Ravindra Sinha; counsel Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Anindita Mitra) argued that Rule 2(g) of 2017 Rules is inconsistent with India''s binding obligations under the Ramsar Convention, 1971

• Ramsar Convention expressly includes BOTH natural and artificial wetlands, whether permanent or temporary, without distinction

• Impact of 2017 definition: 39 of 94 Ramsar Convention wetlands in India are human-made; they would lose protected wetland status because the Rule carves out exclusions for waterbodies constructed for drinking water, irrigation, aquaculture, salt production, recreation, and allied purposes

• Comparison with earlier 2010 Rules: (1) 2010 Rules adopted the Ramsar definition in full and included human-made wetlands (2) 2010 created Central and State Wetland Authorities and imposed explicit prohibitions on reclamation and permanent construction (3) 2017 framework dilutes these safeguards — removed the Central Wetland Authority, deleted the schedule of prohibited activities, contracted the definitional scope

• Argued violation of "principle of non-regression" (governments must not weaken existing legal protections)

• Petition also alleged violation of SC''s own M.K. Balakrishnan v. Union of India (2017) judgment that directed protection of all 2,01,503 wetlands in the National Wetland Atlas

• 2017 Rules also departed from the proven scientific manner of identifying wetlands — based on functional characteristics (hydrology, soil saturation, biodiversity support, flood moderation, groundwater recharge) rather than origin (natural vs human-made)

• ISRO''s National Wetland Atlas 2011 and National Wetland Inventory and Assessment use the functional approach

🎯 UPSC Relevance: GS3 (Environment — Conservation, Ecosystems, EIA, Ramsar Convention, judicial review of environmental rules); GS2 (Judiciary as protector of environment, doctrine of non-regression)

📝 Prelims Facts:

• Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance: signed 1971 in Ramsar, Iran; entered force 1975; India ratified 1982
• India has 94 Ramsar sites (as cited in article); largest in Asia; includes Chilika Lake, Keoladeo, Wular, Loktak, Sundarbans, etc.
• Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules: first issued 2010; superseded by 2017 Rules
• 2017 Rules — Rule 2(g): contested definition of wetland; excludes most artificial waterbodies
• M.K. Balakrishnan v. UoI (2017) — landmark SC judgment directing protection of 2,01,503 wetlands identified in National Wetland Atlas
• National Wetland Atlas (2011) — prepared by ISRO''s Space Applications Centre (SAC), Ahmedabad
• Principle of non-regression: an environmental law doctrine that prohibits weakening of existing protections

🔑 Key Term: Principle of Non-Regression — A doctrine in international environmental law holding that once legal protections for the environment are established, they cannot be diluted or rolled back. Originated in EU environmental jurisprudence and increasingly cited by Indian courts.