Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance of Wetland Degradation, Issues Sweeping Directions to State Authorities

A vacation bench at Jodhpur invoked suo motu jurisdiction after newspaper reports revealed that only a fraction of Rajasthan's approximately 46,748 wetland units have been notified under the Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017, with many facing encroachment, sewage discharge and waste dumping.

On 1 June 2026, a vacation bench of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur, comprising Dr. Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Ms. Justice Rekha Borana, took suo motu cognizance of the deteriorating condition of wetlands across Rajasthan. Acting on newspaper reports published in Rajasthan Patrika, the bench registered the matter as a suo motu Public Interest Litigation under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The court directed sixteen State authorities — from the Chief Secretary down to District Collectors of Udaipur, Ajmer, Bharatpur and Phalodi — to file detailed affidavits and status reports. Three advocates were appointed as amici curiae. The matter is listed for 6 July 2026.

What the Newspaper Reports Disclosed

The Rajasthan Patrika report headlined “प्रदेश के वेटलैंड्स पर संकट” formed the trigger for the court's intervention. The report indicated that Rajasthan possesses approximately 46,748 wetland units spread across different regions of the State, yet only a small fraction has been notified for statutory protection under the Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017.

The reports further described wetlands across the State facing threats from pollution, encroachments, discharge of sewage and waste water, dumping of solid waste, land-use changes and shrinking water spread areas. Wetlands of ecological and ornithological significance were specifically mentioned as suffering from sewage inflow, reduction of catchment areas and shrinking ecosystems.

The bench treated the newspaper reports as part of the record and directed all respondents to specifically address the concerns raised in them through their respective responses.

Constitutional and Statutory Framework the Bench Invoked

The order sets out the constitutional basis for intervention at some length. Article 21, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, was held to guarantee not merely survival but the right to live with dignity in a healthy environment. Wetlands, by sustaining biodiversity, maintaining ecological balance and recharging groundwater, were described as integral to the meaningful enjoyment of that right.

Article 48A, which casts an obligation on the State to protect and improve the environment and safeguard forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife, was held to squarely cover wetlands as a confluence of those ecological resources. Article 51A(g), recognising protection of the natural environment as a fundamental duty of every citizen, was read alongside Article 48A to frame a collective constitutional responsibility.

On the statutory side, the bench referred to the Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017, framed under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. Those Rules envisage preparation of comprehensive inventories, delineation of boundaries, identification of zones of influence, regulation of prohibited and regulated activities and formulation of integrated management plans. They also contemplate the constitution and functioning of State Wetland Authorities for monitoring and conservation.

The bench additionally invoked the Public Trust Doctrine, holding that wetlands, by virtue of their ecological significance and public utility, are resources held by the State in trust for the benefit of the people and future generations and cannot be permitted to suffer degradation owing to administrative inaction. The principles of sustainable development, the precautionary approach and inter-generational equity were cited as further grounds requiring conservation of wetland resources for present and future generations.

India's status as a contracting party to the Ramsar Convention was noted, with the bench observing that wetland conservation is not merely a matter of environmental policy but a significant component of sustainable development and ecological governance.

Why Rajasthan's Situation Warranted Immediate Attention

The bench emphasised that the issues disclosed by the newspaper reports were not confined to the degradation of a few individual wetlands but reflected a larger and continuing concern relating to identification, notification, protection, conservation and scientific management of wetlands across the entire State.

The court noted that in arid and semi-arid regions such as Rajasthan, wetlands assume even greater significance as critical components of ecological security and sustainable development. The loss of wetlands was described as often irreversible, with long-term consequences for biodiversity, groundwater recharge, water security and climate resilience. The bench observed that the failure to identify, notify, conserve and protect wetlands in accordance with the applicable statutory framework may result in increased vulnerability to droughts and floods, deterioration of water quality and destruction of habitats essential for wildlife and migratory species.

The court also noted that the issue of identification, notification and conservation of wetlands has engaged the attention of the Supreme Court in Ravindra Sinha & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. W.P. (Civil) No. 463/2026, concerning implementation of the statutory framework governing wetlands across the country.

Scope of the Affidavits and Status Reports Directed

The bench issued a detailed list of matters to be covered by the respondents in their affidavits. These include:

• A district-wise inventory of wetlands identified within the State, indicating geographical extent, ecological significance, ownership status and present condition.
• Details of all wetlands notified under the Wetlands (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017, along with the status of wetlands identified but not yet notified and reasons for non-notification.
• Details regarding preparation of digital inventories, GIS mapping, boundary demarcation and maintenance of records.
• Status of Ramsar Sites situated within Rajasthan, including ecological condition, biodiversity profile, management plans and conservation measures.
• Details regarding encroachments, illegal constructions, land-use changes and action taken for removal of encroachments and restoration.
• Details regarding discharge of sewage, untreated waste water, industrial effluents and municipal waste into wetlands, along with remedial measures.
• Details regarding biodiversity assessments, migratory bird habitats, protected species and ecological monitoring.
• Details regarding constitution, functioning, meetings and decisions of the State Wetland Authority, including compliance with the 2017 Rules.
• Details regarding funds allocated and utilised for wetland conservation, restoration and management during the preceding five years.
• Details regarding coordination mechanisms between the State Wetland Authority, Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board, Forest Department, Urban Local Bodies and District Administrations.
• A comprehensive action plan indicating short-term, medium-term and long-term measures proposed for identification, notification, protection, restoration and sustainable management of wetlands throughout the State.

The State Government was separately directed to place before the court a consolidated report indicating the total number of wetlands identified, the number notified till date, the criteria adopted for notification and the proposed timeline for consideration of remaining wetlands requiring statutory protection.

Interim Directions Pending Final Hearing

Pending the next date of hearing, the bench issued a set of interim directions binding on the State Government, the State Wetland Authority and all concerned authorities. These include:

A State-wide survey of wetlands is to be undertaken and a district-wise status report placed before the court. No further encroachment, reclamation, dumping, filling, construction activity or alteration of the physical boundaries of identified wetlands is to be permitted without due process of law and strict compliance with the applicable statutory framework. All major sources of sewage discharge, municipal waste, industrial effluents and other pollutants entering wetlands are to be identified and remedial measures placed on record. No untreated sewage, municipal waste, industrial effluents, construction debris or other pollutants are to be discharged into wetlands or their catchment areas.

The bench further directed that wetlands affected by encroachments, illegal constructions or unauthorised land-use changes be identified and details of action taken or proposed for restoration placed before the court. Wetlands of ecological, hydrological or biodiversity significance that have not yet been notified under the 2017 Rules are to be assessed. Status quo is to be maintained with regard to ecologically sensitive wetlands identified by competent authorities until further orders, except where restoration and conservation measures are being undertaken in accordance with law.

The Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board was specifically directed to conduct water quality assessment and environmental impact evaluation of major wetlands identified as being affected by pollution, sewage discharge or waste dumping, and to submit a comprehensive report indicating contamination levels, environmental risks, remedial measures required and action taken against violators.

The Chief Secretary was directed to ensure circulation of the order to all District Collectors in the State and to obtain district-wise information relating to wetlands through the respective District Administrations.

Expert Consultation and Amicus Curiae

The State Government was directed to consult wetland ecologists, hydrologists, biodiversity experts, ornithologists, environmental scientists and representatives of academic and research institutions for undertaking a comprehensive assessment of the status of wetlands within the State and for formulating appropriate measures for their identification, notification, conservation, restoration and sustainable management.

Mr. Jubin Mehta, Mr. Divik Mathur and Mr. Harshvardhan Singh Rathore, Advocates, were appointed as amici curiae to assist the court. The Registry was directed to furnish copies of the order along with the newspaper reports to the amici curiae and all respondents for immediate compliance.

On behalf of the respondents, Mr. Rajesh Panwar, Senior Advocate and Additional Advocate General, assisted by Mr. Ayush Gehlot, along with Mr. N.S. Rajpurohit, Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi, Mr. Mahendra Bishnoi and Mr. P.S. Chundawat, Additional Advocates General and Government Counsel, were directed to obtain instructions and update the court regarding immediate measures undertaken by the concerned authorities.

Order

The vacation bench registered the proceedings as a suo motu Public Interest Litigation titled Suo Motu: In Re: Protection, Conservation and Notification of Wetlands in the State of Rajasthan and Preservation of Biodiversity, Groundwater Recharge and Ecological Sustainability under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Notices were issued to all sixteen respondents. The matter is listed for hearing on 6 July 2026.