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

Subscribed with another email? Logout and Login with that one. Account subscription benefits alongside Premium Stories, Editorials, Opinions and more. Unlock these with Subscription The View From India Looking at World Affairs from the Indian perspective. First Day First Show News and reviews from the world of cinema and streaming. Today's Cache Your download of the top 5 technology stories of the day. Science For All The weekly newsletter from science writers takes the jargon out of science and puts the fun in! Data Point Decoding the headlines with facts, figures, and numbers THEdge At the cutting edge of education and careers Health Matters Ramya Kannan writes to you on getting to good health, and staying there Gender Agenda Stories from beyond the binary. The Hindu On Books Books of the week, reviews, excerpts, new titles and features. Published - May 26, 2026 09:47 pm IST - NEW DELHI Image used for representational purposes only. | Photo Credit: S. Subramanium The Supreme Court on Tuesday (May 26, 2026) agreed to examine a challenge to the constitutional validity of the definition of ‘wetlands’ in the Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017, for arbitrarily excluding most human-made, artificial, and historically developed wetlands from environmental protection and diluting accountability through decentralised oversight. A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant issued a formal notice to the Union Government on a petition filed jointly by a group of environmental activists and professionals led by Ravindra Sinha that the definition of ‘wetlands’ in Rule 2(g) of the 2017 law was inconsistent with India’s binding international obligations under the Ramsar Convention, 1971. The Convention expressly included both natural and artificial wetlands, whether permanent or temporary, without distinction, senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan and advocate Anindita Mitra submitted for the petitioners. “The definition under the 2017 Rules will have the disastrous impact of 39 human-made wetlands, out of a total of 94 Ramsar Convention wetlands located in India, losing their status as protected wetlands. By carving out exclusions for waterbodies constructed for drinking water, irrigation, aquaculture, salt production, recreation, and allied purposes, the Rule has the effect of removing a substantial majority of India’s wetlands from the protective framework of environmental law,” the petitioners submitted. The petition submitted that the 2010 Rules, which the 2017 one replaced, had included human-made wetlands, including all forms of tanks. Rule 2(g) of the 2010 Rules had protected waterbodies/tanks specifically constructed for drinking water purposes and structures exclusively used for aquaculture, salt production, recreation and irrigation purposes. The dilution witnessed in the 2017 Rules violated the principle of non-regression, which prohibits governments from weakening an existing legal protection. “While the 2010 Rules adopted the Ramsar definition in full, created Central and State Wetland Authorities, and imposed explicit prohibitions on reclamation and permanent construction, the 2017 framework dilutes these safeguards by removing the Central authority, deleting the schedule of prohibited activities, and contracting the definitional scope of wetlands,” Mr. Sankaranarayanan submitted. The petition highlighted that the Supreme Court’s own judgment in M.K. Balakrishnan v. Union of India (reported in 2017) has been violated. “This court had directed that all 2,01,503 wetlands identified in the National Wetland Atlas be protected... Instead of implementing these directions, the Union government has superseded the 2010 Rules and introduced a narrower definition that defeats the very mandate of this court,” the petitioners submitted. The 2017 Rules has also departed from the proven manner of identification and recording of wetlands in national wetland inventories based on their functional characteristics, including hydrology, soil saturation, biodiversity support, flood moderation, and groundwater recharge rather than their origin, that is, human-made or natural. India’s own National Wetland Atlas, 2011, and the National Wetland Inventory and Assessment prepared by the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) classify natural and artificial wetlands together as part of a unified ecological continuum, the petition said. environmental issues / wetlands / wetlands / law / court Copyright© 2026, THG PUBLISHING PVT LTD. or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. Terms & conditions | Institutional Subscriber Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments. We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please registe

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

Key takeaways

Also covered by

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

Key takeaways

Also covered by

More in international