The Centre has revoked, with immediate effect, the environmental clearance granted to Godrej Properties for its commercial complex, Godrej Eternia, at Industrial Area, Phase-1, observing that no wildlife clearance was obtained before starting the project.
The order, under Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, was issued on September 30.
The Union ministry of environment observed that the nearly five-acre commercial complex falls within a 10-km radius of the eco-sensitive Sukhna Wildlife Sanctuary and City Bird Sanctuary, and thus requires mandatory clearance from the Standing Committee of the National Board for Wildlife (NBWL) before any construction.
Firm’s argument rejected
The complex had come up in 2015 and the UT estate office had issued its occupation certificate on June 9 that year. The property was subsequently sold or transferred to several individual owners and business entities and became a major commercial centre in Industrial Area, Phase-I.
Godrej Properties’ argued that it had applied for wildlife-clearance retrospectively. The company stated that there was no blanket 10-km eco-sensitive zone (ESZ) around Sukhna Wildlife Sanctuary at the time and that the notified ESZ was later fixed at between 2 km and 2.75 km. It had also contended that the project site was about 6.75 km away from the sanctuary.
The Ministry, however, held that the requirement for prior wildlife clearance existed before the project got environment clearance in 2009.
{{/usCountry}}The Ministry, however, held that the requirement for prior wildlife clearance existed before the project got environment clearance in 2009.
{{/usCountry}}It relied on directions issued by the Supreme Court (SC) in December 2006 and a subsequent Union environment ministry circular dated February 27, 2007.
In its December 4, 2006 order, the SC had directed that cases where environmental clearance had already been granted for activities within the 10-km zone be referred to the Standing Committee of the NBWL. The Ministry’s February 27, 2007 circular stipulated that developmental projects falling within 10 km of wildlife sanctuaries or national parks and recommended for environmental clearance would also require clearance under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.
Long-running dispute
The matter had first come under scrutiny in May 2023 when the UT decided to appoint a one-person committee, headed by the deputy director general of forests and regional officer, Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change, Chandigarh, to examine whether the officers or competent authorities in the administration had acted in accordance with applicable rules and regulations.
In August 2023, the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) flagged alleged non-compliances to the Ministry. Later, the UT department of environment also reported to the Centre that the construction had been completed without wildlife clearance.
Occupation certificate cancelled in 2024
The dispute escalated in July 2024 when, following directions from the Supreme Court-appointed central empowered committee (CEC), the administration cancelled Godrej Eternia’s occupation certificate on grounds of environmental and building violations. The administration also directed that the building should not be put to further habitable use.
The action affected occupants of the complex, with around 17 allottees subsequently approaching the Punjab and Haryana high court (HC) against the cancellation.
The matter took another turn in February 2025 when the Central Bureau of Investigation registered a case against the Godrej developers, other parties and unidentified UT administration officials over alleged cheating and criminal conspiracy relating to environmental and wildlife clearances. The investigation also examined how the occupation certificate had been granted despite the alleged absence of the requisite wildlife clearance. Godrej Properties subsequently approached the HC seeking quashing of the FIR.
SC-appointed panel had taken a different view
The latest Ministry order follows a June 2025 report of the CEC that took a different view of the wildlife-clearance issue.
According to the report, the committee found that Godrej Eternia had complied with the explicit conditions of its environmental clearance and held that the requirement for NBWL clearance was not specifically stipulated in the environmental clearance or backed by a binding direction applicable to the project. But the environment ministry has now disagreed with that interpretation.