The Great Indian Bustard (“GIB”) and the Lesser Florican (“LF”), two birds native to India’s grasslands were officially recognized as ‘Critically Endangered’ by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). A primary driver for this alarming status was the high rate of mortality of both birds due to collisions with the dense network of overhead power transmission lines in their shared habitat—a region that is also a hotspot for India’s solar and wind energy projects.

In response to such alarming extinction, a public interest litigation (“PIL”), M.K. Ranjitsinh and Ors. v. Union of Indian and Ors. (Writ Petition (C) No. 838 of 2019) was filed in 2019 before the Supreme Court of India (“Court”). The PIL sought urgent measures to conserve the GIB and LF, to which the Court responded with the following two orders:

1.First order dated April 19, 2021 (“2021 Order”): The Court initially imposed a sweeping, blanket restriction on the installation of overhead transmission lines across approximately 99,000 sq. kms., identified as priority and potential GIB habitats. The order mandated undergrounding of existing low voltage overhead powerlines and where feasible, high-voltage overhead power lines. Furthermore, it required the installation of Bird Flight Diverters (“BFDs”) on existing lines. For new installations, the order stipulated that all new low-voltage power lines must be laid underground, and new high-voltage lines should also be undergrounded where feasible.

2.Second order dated March 21, 2024 (“2024 Order”): The 2021 Order posed practical and economic challenges and would severely impact India’s renewable energy targets and international climate commitments. Therefore, the Court recalled its blanket restriction under the 2021 Order, imposed an injunction on the identified priority and potential area and constituted a 9-member expert committee (“Committee”) to recommend a holistic strategy that would balance conservation with sustainable development.

After years of uncertainty, the Court, in its landmark judgment on December 19, 2025 (“Judgement”), has now provided much-needed regulatory certainty for existing and proposed solar and wind power projects in Rajasthan and Gujarat.

The Supreme Court’s Final Mandate

While striking a balance between protection of the endangered birds and India’s renewable energy goals, the Court has accepted and mandated the following key recommendations from the Committee’s reports for Rajasthan and Gujarat:

(i) Rationalization of GIB Habitat: Focusing on the most critical habitats for GIB and LF, the earlier identified vast area of 99,000 sq. km. has been reduced to a revised priority area of 14,013 sq. kms. in Rajasthan and 740 sq. kms in Gujarat (“Revised Priority Area”).

(ii) Restrictions on New Projects and overhead powerlines: Within the Revised Priority Area, the Court has mandated the following: (a) complete prohibition on the installation of new wind turbines; (b) prohibition on new solar parks/ plants with a capacity exceeding 2 MW; (c) no expansion of existing solar parks; and (d) no new overhead powerlines except through dedicated power corridors and for capacities of 11 kV and below. It must be noted that the Committee has not suggested such restriction on the laying of powerlines in the potential area (i.e., the area outside the Revised Priority Area).

(iii) Insulated Cables: All existing and new power lines of 11 kV and below in the Revised Priority Area must be mitigated using insulated cables in a horizontal configuration or with bunching. However, no mitigation is required for existing and future powerlines of 11 kV and below voltage in the 100-meter buffer around the settlement area.

(iv) Powerline Corridors: Within the Revised Priority Area, all future power lines must be routed through the following power corridors: (a) a power corridor for the powerlines with up to 5 km width at a distance of 5 km or more to the south of the southernmost enclosure of Desert national Park in Rajasthan; (b) a power corridor for the powerlines with up to 1 to 2 km width along the Akrimita-Bachunda 22 kV transmission line upto Bhachunda 400 kV GIS; and (c) a power corridor for the powerlines from Kothara to Sindhodii Nani substation in the west and Suthri substation in the south. The 66 kV and above powerlines which are located between Nani Sindhodii and Godhra must be rerouted through the power corridor. Further, within the non-Revised Priority Area, all future lines are required to be routed through the powerline corridors and the routes are required to be optimised to maximize their shared common stretch to the extent possible.

(v) BFDs: Concurring with the Committee’s view on their unproven efficacy and high maintenance costs, the Court has put a pause on the mandatory installation of BFDs. Such installation is now dependent upon the outcome of comprehensive scientific studies.

(vi) Specific Powerline Mitigation Mandates:

(a) Rajasthan: The Court has directed the following in terms of the powerlines located within the Revised Priority Area in Rajasthan:

For 33 kV:

(i) Immediate Action: The Court has directed immediate undergrounding of 80 km out of 104 km of 33 kV lines (as identified in the 2021 Order).

(ii) Contingent/ Future Action: Remaining 33 kV lines are required to be identified by the Wildlife Institute of India (“WII”) and the Rajasthan Forest Department within 3 months of the Judgement. These lines are then required to be mitigated through undergrounding, re-routing or conversion to insulated cables. Further, segments of 33 kV and above powerlines passing through enclosures are required to be rerouted to locations that are 1 to 2 km away from the boundaries of enclosures.

For 66 kV:

(i) Contingent/ Future Action: The court has directed re-routing of 9 identified lines of 66 kV, using a horizontal conductor design and in horizontal configuration as per their indicated alignments, subject to finalization of route, within 6 months of the date of the Judgement. For the remaining lines, if undergrounding is not feasible, critical sections of such 66 kV and above high-tension power lines are required to be re-routed away from the important GIB habitats in the Revised Priority Area.

250 km critical powerlines:

(i) Contingent/ Future Action: Undergrounding of the 250 km of critical powerlines identified by the WII must be implemented within 2 years from the date of the Judgement.

(b) Gujarat: The Court has directed the following in terms of the powerlines located within the Revised Priority Area in Gujarat:

For 33 kV:

(i) Immediate Action: The Court has directed immediate undergrounding/ re-routing of 4 identified 33 kV lines (79.2 km) located within the Revised Priority Area to outside Revised Priority Area. If undergrounding/ re-routing is not feasible, then such lines must be converted to insulated cable arranged in horizontal configuration. Such feasibility will be decided by a joint committee comprising of State Transmission Utility, Central Electricity Authority (“CEA”), Gujarat Forest Department (“GFD”) and WII.

(ii) Contingent/ Future Action: Remaining 33 kV lines (to be identified by WII within 3 months) located in the Revised Priority Area are required to be mitigated through undergrounding, re-routing or insulated cables, based on the feasibility evaluation by the CEA.

For 66 kV:

(i) Immediate Action: Immediate undergrounding of 9 identified 66 kV lines (64.9 km). If undergrounding is not feasible for any stretch of the lines, then such stretches of lines must be re-routed to outside Revised Priority Area or through the proposed power corridors. In case of the latter, the State Transmission Utility or the owner must finalize the new route within 6 months in consultation with the CEA, WII and GFD,

(ii) Contingent/ Future Action: Remaining 66 kV lines (10.2 km) in the Revised Priority Area will be mitigated on a case-to-case basis.

For 220 kV and above lines:

(i) Contingent/ Future Action: 220 kV and above lines are required to be re-routed outside the Revised Priority Area or through the power corridor within the Revised Priority Area or laid in horizontal configuration. The decision for each of such lines will be decided by the joint committee on a case-to-case basis.

(vii) Time-Bound Mitigation: The Court has directed that all mitigation measures, including undergrounding and re-routing of power lines as suggested in the Committee report, must be initiated immediately and completed within 2 years from the date of the Judgment.

(viii) Corporate Environmental Responsibility: In a significant observation, the Court expanded the concept of Corporate Social Responsibility (“CSR”) to include ‘Corporate Environmental Responsibility’. It held that under Section 135 and Section 166(2) of the Companies Act, 2013, the ‘Polluter Pays’ principle and Article 51A(g) of the Constitution of India, corporations have a fundamental duty to protect the environment. CSR funds, therefore, are not mere charity but a constitutional obligation, they must be directed towards conservation efforts, especially where corporate activities impact endangered species. Consequently, the Court directed that such funds must be directed towards ex-situ and in-situ conservation of GIB.

Other Committee Recommendations to be Implemented:

In addition to its specific directives, the Court has also mandated that all other recommendations made by the Committee must be implemented as soon as possible. These recommendations include the following:

(i) Immediate implementation of measures for in-situ and ex-situ conservation of GIB within the priority areas of Rajasthan and Gujarat.

(ii) Finalisation of the next phase of Project Bustard (Phase-II 2029-2033) and its funding through the National CAMPA funds.

(iii) Establishing a robust program to continuously monitor GIB and LF populations and their habitats, and to study the long-term effects of climate change on the species.

MNRE Order: Relief for Existing Project Developers

In the wake of the Judgement, the Ministry of New & Renewable Energy (“MNRE”) issued an order on January 12, 2026, to address the significant delays faced by renewable energy projects in the GIB areas (“Order”). Recognizing that the pendency of the final judgment created regulatory uncertainty, the MNRE acknowledged that many developers were unable to obtain approvals under Section 68 of the Electricity Act, 2003, for the laying of overhead transmission lines. Consequently, the MNRE has directed its renewable energy implementing agencies (“REIAs”), i.e., the Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI), NTPC Limited, NHPC Limited, and SJVN Limited, to treat the delay occurring between March 21, 2024 (the date of the 2024 Order) and December 19, 2025 (the date of the Judgement) as an event akin to ‘Force Majeure’. The Order applies to projects where these REIAs are acting as an “Intermediary Procurer”.

Under this directive, affected renewable energy developers are entitled to an extension in their Scheduled Commissioning Date (“SCD”)/ Scheduled Commencement of Supply Date (SCSD) for a period commensurate with the delay. This extension is calculated from the date of the developer’s application for Section 68 approval (or March 21, 2024, whichever is later) up to December 19, 2025. To claim this relief, developers must submit a formal application to the relevant implementing agencies with documentary evidence and provide an undertaking to comply with the Supreme Court’s directions. The Order, however, excludes projects whose SCD was prior to March 21, 2024, and those who had not applied for the Section 68 approval before the Judgement. Further, the MNRE has urged developers to pass on the benefit of this extension to their EPC contractors and suppliers and has requested other central bodies to grant similar relief concerning grid connectivity and the waiver of ISTS charges.

Conclusion

This Judgment establishes a critical legal precedent by balancing India’s renewable energy commitments with its constitutional duty to protect critically endangered species. It introduces a nuanced, area-specific regulatory framework, replacing a blanket ban with targeted restrictions and mitigation mandates within defined priority zones. Ultimately, the ruling expands corporate obligations by embedding environmental protection as a fundamental component of corporate social responsibility for all infrastructure projects. Further, the subsequent MNRE Order complements this judicial mandate by providing crucial commercial relief, treating project delays during the litigation period as an event akin to ‘Force Majeure’.

Authors: Akshay Malhotra – Partners, Kopal Bhargava – Associate

Disclaimer: This publication only highlights key issues and is not intended to be comprehensive. The contents of this publication do not constitute any opinion or determination on, or certification in respect of, the application of Indian law by Talwar Thakore & Associates (“TT&A”). No part of this publication should be considered an advertisement or solicitation of TT&A’s professional services.