Climate Change Obligations of the State
Ridhima Pandey v Union of India
The Supreme Court will examine India’s international climate obligations and the government’s compliance with enforceable statutory and institutional measures under Article 21
Pending
Parties
Appellant: Ridhima Pandey
Lawyers: Srishti Agnihotri
Respondent: Union of India
Lawyers: Raj Bahadur Yadav, Amrish Kumar, Sudarshan Lamba, Gurmeet Singh Makker
Case Details
Case Number: CA No. 388 of 2021
Next Hearing:
Last Updated: September 11, 2025
Key Issues
Do India’s statutory and policy measures, including the Environment Protection Act, 1986, provide adequate and enforceable responses to the climate crisis?
Are the right to a healthy environment and the principle of intergenerational equity enforceable constitutional guarantees under Article 21 and the Public Trust Doctrine?
Do fragmented ministry-specific approaches undermine effective climate action and can judicial directions mandate coordinated inter-ministerial mechanisms?
Case Description
In 2017, nine-year-old Ridhima Pandey filed a petition, through her father, before the National Green Tribunal (NGT), arguing that the Government of India had failed to take adequate steps to mitigate climate change. She contended that this failure violated domestic environmental laws and India’s international commitments under the Paris Agreement, 2015. The NGT dismissed the petition in January 2019. It held that the issues raised were already covered and there was “no reason to presume” that the same were not reflected under existing environmental regulations and policies.
Pandey then appealed to the Supreme Court. Her appeal was admitted. Over time, the Court expanded the scope of the case to monitor various aspects and framed climate change as a part of the fundamental right to life under Article 21. The recognition of climate change as part of the fundamental right to life was first articulated in M.K. Ranjitsinh v Union of India (2024). The Ridhima Pandey case builds on this precedent by extending it into judicial supervision of government compliance and coordinated climate action.
In December 2024, the Court appointed advocates Jay Cheema and Sudhir Mishra as amici curiae to assist it with the technical and legal aspects of climate governance.
In February 2025, the Supreme Court issued significant directions, ordering eight central ministries, including Environment, Power, Coal, and Housing, to coordinate on climate action. The Court criticised the prevailing “siloed” approach and called for synergy across government departments. It also observed that existing statutes such as the Environment Protection Act, 1986 and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, require reassessment to incorporate enforceable climate-centric mandates.
On 22 July 2025, the Court directed the Ministry of Power, the Central Electricity Authority, and the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission to file a joint affidavit within four weeks, outlining a national carbon reduction roadmap for the power sector. The July 2025 submissions of the amicus quantified emissions from India’s power sector and highlighted the clustering of coal plants near population centres. This marked the Court’s most detailed intervention in operational climate governance to date.