Introduction
The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (“MoEFCC”) issued two key guidelines on industrial consent under environmental laws — the Control of Air Pollution (Grant, Refusal or Cancellation of Consent) Guidelines, 2025, under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, and the Control of Water Pollution (Grant, Refusal or Cancellation of Consent) Guidelines, 2025, under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, on January 29 and 30, 2025. These guidelines establish a structured framework for granting, refusing, and cancelling consents for industries. By streamlining approvals, enforcing stricter compliance, and enhancing regulatory oversight, they promote transparency, accountability, and ease of doing business.
Key Provisions and Regulatory Changes
Harmonised Consent Application and Approval Mechanism
The Guidelines introduce a Common Consent Mechanism, allowing single application and integrated approvals under the Air and Water Acts, along with authorisation under the Hazardous and Other Wastes (Management and Transboundary Movement) Rules, 2016. Industries seeking Consent to Establish (CTE) must apply using Form I, submitting detailed project specifications, pollution control measures, and the requisite fees. For Consent to Operate (CTO), applications must be made in Form II, accompanied by compliance reports confirming adherence to environmental regulations. Another significant development is the planned introduction of a single-window digital platform within a year. This system will centralise all application processing, inspections, and approvals, ensuring transparency, efficiency, and reduced bureaucratic delays.
Consent Validity Periods and Renewals
The validity periods for both CTE and CTO have been classified based on industry type. The CTE is valid for five years, with a possible extension of two years, upon request. The CTO validity varies by industrial category:
- Red-category industries: 5 years
- Orange-category industries: 10 years
- Green-category industries: 15 years
- Blue-category industries: Additional 2 years, beyond Green-category norms
Industries that apply for CTO renewal at least four months before expiry will receive a 5% fee rebate, incentivising proactive compliance. Conversely, late renewals are subject to steep penalties, increasing with the delay, ranging from 25% to 100% of the consent fee, with the highest penalty imposed for applications made post-expiry.
Enhanced Inspection and Compliance Protocols
The new framework grants State Pollution Control Boards (“SPCBs”) greater oversight over compliance monitoring. SPCBs are empowered to conduct site inspections before granting consent, with prior notice to applicants. To obtain and renew CTOs, industries must submit comprehensive reports, including compliance with environmental clearance requirements, annual hazardous waste returns, and environmental statements under the Environment Protection Rules, 1986.
Additionally, industries falling under prescribed categories must implement Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems (“CEMS”), ensuring real-time tracking of emissions and effluent discharges. This requirement underscores the growing emphasis on continuous compliance, rather than periodic enforcement.
Location Restrictions and Environmental Criteria
The guidelines introduce stringent location-based restrictions to protect environmentally sensitive areas. Red category industries must be located at least 500 meters from water bodies, settlements, schools, and national parks, while Orange and Green category industries must be located beyond 200 metres and 100 metres, respectively, from the same. Further, red category industries must be located beyond 500 metres from the nearest boundary of surface water body (flood plain/ HFL/Red line), while Orange category industries must maintain a distance of 75 meters if generating effluents, or 30 meters if not generating effluents, and Green category industries must be at least 30 meters away from the same.
Furthermore, industrial plants are strictly prohibited from altering or obstructing natural stormwater drains, ensuring that natural water flow remains undisturbed. The SPCBs are responsible for ensuring compliance with these location criteria, alongside other statutory and regulatory requirements.
Strict Grounds for Refusal and Cancellation of Consent
The guidelines provide an explicit list of grounds for refusing or cancelling consent. These include non-compliance with location norms, emission and effluent standards, and court orders, as well as failure to install prescribed pollution control equipment. Any variation in the approved manufacturing process or a submission of false or incomplete information could also lead to cancellation. Before revoking consent, SPCBs are required to provide a reasonable opportunity for a hearing, reinforcing procedural fairness.
The Consent Process: Old v. New Comparison
| PARAMETER | OLD FRAMEWORK | NEW FRAMEWORK |
| Consent Application | Separate applications for air, water, and hazardous waste. | Single application covering air, water, and hazardous waste. |
| Mode of submission | Physical (primarily) | Online, through a centralised portal |
| Processing, site inspection, and decision timelines | No uniform or fixed timelines across states | Stipulates timelines for site inspection and consent decision. Green category – 30 days Orange category – 45 days Red category – 60 days If SPCBs fail to act, the State-Level Monitoring Committee must decide within 30 days. [There are no separate timelines issued for site inspections. However, site inspections must be completed within the processing timelines, as prescribed.] |
| Assessment criteria | Assessment criteria differed across states. | The assessment criteria is uniform across states, minimising the scope for subjective decision-making. These are as follows: Verification of pollution control equipment as per approved specifications; Compliance with National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) under the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986; Verification of wastewater discharge systems in accordance with the General Standards for Discharge of Environmental Pollutants, Schedule VI of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986;Compliance with distance criteria from water bodies, settlements, and protected areas, as per the newly specified minimum buffer distances. |
| Basis for Calculation of Fees | Fees were primarily based on capital investment (Capex) of the industry. In some states, fees were also linked to pollution load, industry category (Red, Orange, Green, White), and effluent generation. There was no standardised methodology for fee determination across states, resulting in inconsistencies in charges. | Fees continue to be based on capital investment (Capex), with additional considerations for industry category and pollution load. However, fee schedules must now adhere to national guidelines, ensuring greater uniformity across states. |
| Fee increase | No national cap on fee increases; each SPCB had discretion to revise fees. Some states increased fees arbitrarily, leading to unpredictable compliance costs for industries. Fee hikes were often implemented without prior notice, making budgeting difficult for businesses. | Fee increases are now capped at 10% every two years to prevent sudden, excessive hikes. SPCBs are still allowed to lower fees at their discretion, but they cannot raise them beyond the 10% cap. Fee revisions must follow a structured review process, ensuring greater predictability for industries. |
| Mode of Payment | Payments were made via demand drafts, challans, or bank transfers. In some states, online payment portals existed, but they were not standardised and often required physical verifications of transactions, causing delays. | Fees must be submitted digitally via a centralised online portal (to be developed within a year). Once implemented, manual payments will no longer be permitted. |
| Validity of Consent to Establish | Typically valid for five years, but no uniform extension policy. Some states allowed extensions, while others required a fresh application. | Valid for five years, extendable by two (total seven years) upon application, ensuring greater predictability. The consent to operate shall be valid for a period of (a) five years, in case of industrial unit of Red category; (b) 10 years, in case of industrial unit of Orange category; (c) 15 years, in case of industrial unit of Green category, and (d) additional two years, in case of blue category |
| Validity of Consent to Operate | CTO validity varied across states and depended on industry category. Some states granted shorter CTOs (3-5 years) to all industries, requiring frequent renewals. | CTO validity is now clearly defined: Five years for Red industries, 10 years for Orange, 15 years for Green, and 17 years for Blue industries, reducing renewal burdens. |
| Renewal Process | There was no statutory timeline for renewal. Some SPCBs informally advised applying 3-6 months before expiry, but enforcement varied. Many industries delayed renewal due to lack of financial incentives or penalties for late applications. SPCBs had full discretion, with some states charging flat late fees and others allowing operations after CTO expiry, creating a regulatory grey area. SPCBs also had no binding timelines for processing renewals, often taking months or years. Industries operated with expired CTOs without immediate legal consequences. Some SPCBs issued show cause notices or stop-work orders, while others took no action. | The new guidelines establish a strict renewal framework, requiring industries to apply at least 120 days before expiry to receive a 5% rebate on the renewal fee. This incentive encourages early applications and prevents financial burdens. Delayed applications face penalties: a 25% late fee for submissions between 120 and 45 days before expiry, a 50% fee for those within 45 days, and a 100% penalty if filed after expiry, significantly raising non-compliance costs. The guidelines also mandate clear timelines for SPCBs to process renewals: 120 days for Red-category industries, 60 days for Orange, and 30 days for Green. If SPCBs fail to decide within these periods, the case is escalated to the State-Level Monitoring Committee, which must issue a final decision within 30 days, reducing approval delays and regulatory uncertainty. Operating without a valid CTO now carries higher risks, as SPCBs can refuse renewal or revoke consent for non-compliance. Businesses must plan renewals in advance to avoid penalties and operational disruptions. |
| Transparency & Accountability | No mechanism to track pending applications. Industries had to repeatedly follow up with SPCBs for updates. Regulatory discretion led to inconsistent decision-making. | Online tracking of application status via a centralised digital portal (to be developed within a year). If an application is delayed, the State-Level Monitoring Committee must intervene and decide within 30 days. |
| Location Criteria for Industrial Plants | Location restrictions varied across states. Some states had stringent buffer zones, while others had no clear rules, leading to conflicting approvals and legal disputes. | Uniform location criteria established: Minimum distances from water bodies, settlements, educational institutions, and ecological zones are now clearly defined for different industry categories. |
| Continuous Emission & Effluent Monitoring | No real-time monitoring required. Compliance relied on periodic reports and random inspections, making it easier to manipulate emissions data. | Mandatory CEMS for applicable industries as may be notified from time to time, ensuring real-time pollution tracking and better regulatory enforcement. |
| Refusal & Cancellation of Consent | SPCBs could refuse or cancel consent without structured guidelines, leading to inconsistent enforcement. There were no mandatory pre-refusal hearings, and industries had limited recourses against arbitrary rejections. | SPCBs must provide a reasonable hearing opportunity before refusing or revoking consent. The grounds for refusal/ cancellation are now clearly defined, ensuring greater transparency. |
| Monitoring Progress | No state or national-level oversight mechanisms to track SPCB efficiency. Industries had no formal route to challenge delays in approvals. | State-Level and National-Level Monitoring Committees are now empowered to oversee SPCB performance, investigate delays, and recommend disciplinary action where approvals are unjustifiably delayed. |
| Enforcement | No standardised penalties for non-compliance. Enforcement was state-dependent, with some states imposing strict fines and others being lenient. | Industries violating pollution norms may face immediate cancellation of consent. SPCBs are empowered to refer serious violations to adjudicating officers for enforcement under Section 45B of the Water Act and Section 39B of the Air Act. |
Conclusion
The new consent guidelines for air and water mark a significant regulatory shift, balancing streamlined approvals with stricter compliance. Defined timelines and greater transparency enhance predictability, while State-Level Monitoring Committees ensure SPCB accountability for delays. Industries gain certainty, but Red-category sectors such as thermal power, chemicals, and heavy manufacturing face higher compliance costs due to stringent emissions monitoring and stricter location norms. Beyond consent fees, mandatory investments in CEMS and penalties make proactive compliance essential.
Legal risks are now higher, with SPCBs empowered to reject or cancel consent for specific violations, requiring a proactive compliance approach. SMEs and low-pollution industries benefit from extended validity and clearer location criteria, while large corporations face increased scrutiny across states. National and state-level monitoring committees reduce arbitrariness, ensuring uniformity and accountability. In this evolving framework, industries must integrate robust environmental risk assessments and compliance strategies to mitigate liabilities and align with the new legal regime.
