Environmental Clearance vs Consent to Operate: One-Time Project Approval and Continuing Operational Permit

An environmental clearance is obtained once, before a project is built, and remains valid for many years. A consent to operate must be obtained before production starts and renewed periodically for as long as the unit runs. The first is a planning-stage decision on the acceptability of the project; the second is an operational licence to discharge effluents and emissions within prescribed limits. Most regulatory action against running industries, such as refusal of renewal, closure and disconnection of power, happens through the consent to operate.

1. Environmental Clearance

Environmental clearance (EC) is the prior approval under the EIA Notification, 2006 for projects listed in its Schedule, granted by the MoEFCC (Category A) or the SEIAA (Category B) after screening, scoping, public consultation and appraisal. It evaluates the project's overall impacts on land, water, air, biodiversity and people, and its location. It is valid for a fixed period within which the project must commence operations (generally ten years; thirteen for river valley, fifteen for nuclear, and up to thirty for mining projects, after the 2022 amendment). Compliance with EC conditions is monitored by the Ministry's regional offices through six-monthly compliance reports; a fresh EC is needed for expansion, product change or modernisation that increases pollution load.

2. Consent to Operate

Consent to operate (CTO) is the permission of the State Pollution Control Board under Section 25 of the Water Act (to bring into use a new or altered outlet for discharge, or begin to make a new discharge) and Section 21 of the Air Act (to operate an industrial plant in an air pollution control area). After the unit is built and its pollution control equipment installed, the Board inspects and grants CTO with conditions: discharge and emission standards, stack monitoring, effluent treatment, OCEMS, waste handling, record keeping and reporting. CTO is granted for a fixed period (longer for less polluting categories) and must be renewed; the uniform consent guidelines, amended in January 2026, allow States to fix a single CTO fee for periods of five to twenty-five years. The Board may refuse or cancel consent for non-compliance (Section 27, Water Act) and issue closure directions (Section 33A, Water Act; Section 31A, Air Act). White category industries have been exempted from CTO since November 2024. Operating without consent remains a criminal offence (Section 45E, Water Act; Section 39D, Air Act) even after the Jan Vishwas reforms.

3. Key Differences

4. Relationship and Case Law

The two are sequential and complementary. A project needing EC must obtain it first; State Boards ordinarily verify EC compliance before granting CTO, and CTO conditions often incorporate EC conditions. A unit may hold a valid EC but be refused CTO (for example, if its treatment plant is not functional), and a CTO cannot legitimise a project that required but lacked EC. Relevant decisions include:

• Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti v. Union of India, (2017) 5 SCC 326: industries requiring consent must not operate without a functional primary effluent treatment plant, and Boards must disconnect their power;
• Vedanta Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu (Supreme Court, 29 February 2024): the refusal to renew the CTO of the Sterlite copper smelter and its closure were upheld in view of repeated violations;
• Delhi Pollution Control Committee v. Lodhi Property Co. Ltd. (2025): Boards may demand environmental compensation and bank guarantees from units operating without consent; and
• Common Cause (2017) and Alembic (2020): operation of projects without or beyond EC is unlawful.

5. Related Topics and Provisions