MoEFCC Western Ghats ESA Draft Notification 2026: Proposed Restrictions, Coverage and Business Impact
Western Ghats ESA Draft Notification 2026 proposes a 56,825.7 sq km ESA. Review MoEFCC restrictions, covered sectors and the 60-day consultation process.
Schedule a Call Back
The MoEFCC Western Ghats notification, dated 27 July 2026, proposes to identify 56,825.7 square kilometres across Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu as the Western Ghats Ecologically Sensitive Area (ESA).
The draft proposes bans on specified mining, thermal power, Red-category industry and large construction activities. It also places conditions on hydropower, forest diversion and other projects requiring environmental clearance.
These restrictions are not yet final. The notification invites objections and suggestions within 60 days from the date on which Gazette copies are made available to the public. MoEFCC may then issue the final ESA notification state-wise in phases or through one combined notification.
Official source: Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii), S.O. 4106(E), dated 27 July 2026.
Western Ghats ESA Draft Notification 2026 at a Glance
| Particular | Details stated in the draft |
| Issuing authority | Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India |
| Document | Draft Notification S.O. 4106(E) |
| Gazette date | 27 July 2026 |
| Legal basis | Section 3 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and Rule 5(3) of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 |
| Proposed coverage | 56,825.7 square kilometres across six Western Ghats states |
| States covered | Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu |
| Present legal status | Draft issued for public objections and suggestions, not the final ESA notification |
| Consultation period | 60 days from the date on which Gazette copies containing the notification are made available to the public |
| Possible form of final notification | Phased state-wise notifications or one combined notification |
| File number | F. No. 1/04/2012-ESZ-RE |
The draft does not state a separate calendar date as the last day for comments. It links the consultation period to the public availability of the Gazette copies.
Stakeholders should therefore confirm the official availability date before calculating the deadline instead of automatically counting 60 days from 27 July 2026.
Why MoEFCC Has Issued Another Western Ghats ESA Draft
The proposal originates from the High Level Working Group (HLWG), which submitted its report to MoEFCC on 15 April 2013. The HLWG identified approximately 59,940 square kilometres, or around 37% of the Western Ghats natural landscape, as ecologically sensitive.
It also recommended prohibiting or regulating projects and activities considered to have highly interventionist or destructive effects on the ecosystem.
The boundary exercise has remained under consultation for more than a decade because states and local stakeholders raised concerns about village names, physical boundaries, livelihood implications and the extent of land proposed for inclusion.
| Regulatory milestone recorded in the draft | Relevance |
| 15 April 2013 | The HLWG submitted its report to MoEFCC. |
| 10 March 2014 | MoEFCC issued Draft Notification S.O. 733(E), using Kerala’s physically verified ESA area and the HLWG area for the other states. |
| 9 June 2014 | States other than Kerala were permitted to undertake physical verification of ESA boundaries. |
| 7 July and 3 August 2015 | Meetings recorded the clarification that residents would not be displaced and agriculture and plantation activity would not be affected by the proposed restrictions. |
| 3 October 2018 | Draft Notification S.O. 5135(E) was issued after further state-level discussions. |
| 18 April 2022 | MoEFCC constituted a committee to re-examine state suggestions, conservation needs, rights and regional development aspirations. |
| 6 July 2022 | Draft Notification S.O. 3072(E) was published. The committee continued examining discrepancies relating to village names and areas. |
| 27 July 2026 | S.O. 4106(E) was published for another 60-day consultation before finalisation. |
Kerala’s physical verification is a major reason the area in the present draft differs from the original HLWG figure.
The HLWG had recommended 13,108 square kilometres for Kerala. The state proposed 9,993.7 square kilometres, comprising:
- 9,107 square kilometres of forest land, and
- 886.7 square kilometres of non-forest land.
Proposed Western Ghats ESA Coverage across Six States
Annexure A gives the Western Ghats ESA state-wise area for each of the six states covered by the draft.
The Annexure C figures below are serialised entries and should not be treated as a count of verified, unique villages. The notification itself warns that village names may contain errors or duplication and may be updated using state government inputs.
| State | Proposed ESA area (sq km) | Serialised entries in Annexure C |
| Gujarat | 449 | 64 |
| Maharashtra | 17,340 | 2,515 |
| Goa | 1,461 | 108 |
| Karnataka | 20,668 | 1,449 |
| Kerala | 9,993.7 | 131 |
| Tamil Nadu | 6,914 | 135 |
| Total | 56,825.7 | 4,402 entries |
How the Draft Describes the ESA Boundaries
The proposed boundary is supported by several layers of information:
- Annexures B1 to B5 contain state maps and prominent boundary coordinates for Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu.
- Annexure C contains the Western Ghats village list 2026, along with the districts, talukas and notified forests proposed within the ESA.
- Kerala’s detailed village-wise boundary description and cadastral map are stated to be available on the Kerala State Biodiversity Board website.
- Annexure A makes the proposed area provisional rather than final.
For a business, landowner or project developer, a state-level area figure alone is not enough to determine applicability. The village entry, project coordinates, survey or cadastral information and final notified boundary will all matter.
Boundary Data That Requires Stakeholder Verification
The draft acknowledges that village, taluka or district names may contain errors or duplicates. Its schedules contain repeated and bifurcated entries. They should therefore be treated as consultation-stage boundary data rather than converted into a definitive count of unique villages.
There is also an apparent coordinate anomaly in Annexure B4. Karnataka boundary point 45 is printed as longitude 71.2007 and latitude 31.6736, unlike the surrounding Karnataka coordinates.
This information should not be silently corrected. However, the entry is a strong candidate for clarification through the objection and suggestion process.
Activities Proposed to Be Prohibited in the Western Ghats ESA
Paragraph 3(1) proposes four main categories of Eco-sensitive Area restrictions. These restrictions would operate only after the relevant final notification is issued.
| Project or activity | Proposed restriction | Express continuation or exception |
| Mining, quarrying and sand mining | Complete ban within the ESA. Existing mines would be phased out within five years from the date of the final ESA notification or on expiry of the existing mining lease, whichever occurs earlier. | Certain proposals received before 17 April 2013 and still pending may be dealt with under the guidelines and rules existing at that time. |
| Thermal power plants | No new thermal power project and no expansion of an existing thermal power plant would be allowed. | No separate operational exception is stated. |
| Red-category industries | New Red-category industries and expansion of existing Red-category industries, as classified by the CPCB or SPCB from time to time, would be banned. | Existing Red-category industries, including healthcare establishments, may continue under applicable rules and regulations. |
| Building and construction | New and expansion projects with a built-up area of 20,000 square metres or more would be prohibited. | Repair or renovation of existing residential houses would not be restricted, subject to prevailing laws and regulations. |
| Townships and area development | New and expansion projects covering 50 hectares or more, or having a built-up area of 150,000 square metres or more, would be prohibited. | The draft does not state a separate project-specific exemption beyond the general pre-17 April 2013 provision. |
The cut-off exception is narrow. It applies to proposals received before 17 April 2013 by the relevant:
- Expert Appraisal Committee,
- MoEFCC,
- State Level Expert Appraisal Committee, or
- State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority.
The proposal must also remain pending for consideration. The exception does not automatically cover every project conceived, purchased, started or otherwise approved before 17 April 2013.
The draft further states that existing healthcare establishments may continue and proposed Primary Health Centres may be established in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.
Activities Proposed to Be Regulated Rather Than Banned
The draft does not impose a blanket ban on all development. Paragraph 3(2) identifies activities that may proceed subject to additional environmental scrutiny and operating conditions.
1. Conditions for New Hydropower Projects
New hydropower projects may be considered under the Environment Impact Assessment Notification, S.O. 1533(E), dated 14 September 2006, subject to all the following conditions:
- At least 30% of the river flow during the lean season must remain as uninterrupted ecological flow until a comprehensive study establishes a project-specific baseline.
- A cumulative study must assess the effect of each project on river-flow patterns and the loss of forests and biodiversity.
- A minimum distance of three kilometres must be maintained between projects.
- Not more than 50% of the river basin may be affected at any time.
2. Conditions for Industries and EIA-Scheduled Projects
Orange- and White-category industries, as specified by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) or the relevant State Pollution Control Board (SPCB), may be allowed with strict compliance with environmental regulations.
The draft also says efforts should be made to promote industries with lower environmental impacts.
The notification does not separately explain the treatment of every other pollution-control category. A business should not infer permission or prohibition for an unmentioned category solely from that silence. The final notification and applicable CPCB or SPCB classification will need to be checked.
Activities covered by the Schedule to the EIA Notification 2006, other than activities specifically prohibited under the draft, would be examined for:
- cumulative environmental impacts, and
- the development needs of the area.
This assessment would take place before MoEFCC considers granting prior environmental clearance.
3. Forest Diversion and Gram Sabha Consent
Where forest land within the ESA is proposed to be diverted for non-forest use, project information from the application stage through approval must be placed in the public domain.
The information would have to be published on the websites of:
• MoEFCC, and
• the forest department of the relevant state.
The draft also requires compliance with prior informed consent requirements under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006.
Gram Sabha consent for undertaking projects and activities would be mandatory.
What the Draft Says About Residents, Agriculture and Property
The notification’s background records a government clarification that the proposal will not displace or dislocate people living in habitations within the demarcated ESA. It also records that agriculture and plantation activities will not be affected by the draft provisions.
In its operative clauses, the draft further states that:
- ownership of property within the ESA will not be affected,
- repair or renovation of existing residential houses will not be restricted under prevailing laws and regulations,
- existing healthcare establishments may continue under applicable rules, and
- Primary Health Centres may be established in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.
These statements should not be treated as a general exemption from every environmental, forest, pollution-control or land-use law. They address specified concerns and operate alongside other applicable legal requirements.
Monitoring, Annual Oversight and Action for Contravention
The proposed framework assigns primary responsibility for monitoring and enforcement to the six state governments.
Each state would need to:
- establish an effective monitoring and enforcement mechanism,
- strengthen existing regulatory institutions and processes,
- involve local communities in decision-making, and
- share the details of its mechanism with MoEFCC.
MoEFCC, in collaboration with the states, would establish a Western Ghats Decision Support and Monitoring Centre.
The proposed centre would:
- regularly assess and report on the ecological condition of the Western Ghats,
- support implementation of the final notification,
- facilitate science-based decision-making, and
- strengthen enforcement mechanisms.
The draft also prescribes recurring project oversight:
- Post-clearance monitoring would be carried out by the relevant state government, SPCB and MoEFCC Regional Office.
- Projects with environmental clearance or forest clearance in the ESA would be monitored at least once every year by the relevant MoEFCC Regional Office.
- Projects holding Consent to Establish or Consent to Operate under the Water Act, 1974 or Air Act, 1981 would be monitored at least annually by the relevant SPCB.
- Each state government would prepare an annual State of Health Report for its part of the Western Ghats.
- The State of Health Report would describe monitoring and enforcement measures and would be made available in the public domain.
For any violation, Paragraph 5 provides for action under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and other applicable laws. The draft does not set a separate fine or imprisonment term. It also states that the notification will remain subject to final court orders in pending cases.
Likely Business Impact If the Draft Is Finalised
The present notification opens public consultation. It does not itself establish a final ban. If the final notification retains the proposed provisions, the effect will vary by sector, project category and location.
| Stakeholder or sector | Likely operational and commercial implications |
| Mining and quarrying businesses | New operations would face a complete location-based prohibition. Existing mines could have a shortened operating horizon tied to lease expiry or a five-year phase-out following the final notification. |
| Thermal power developers | New thermal projects and capacity expansions within the final ESA boundary would no longer be available options, making early site assessment important. |
| Red-category industries | Existing units could continue subject to applicable rules, but expansion inside the ESA would be restricted. New investment decisions would require reliable location and industry-category assessments. |
| Real-estate and township developers | Large projects meeting the stated thresholds could be prohibited. Survey-level boundary checks would become important before land acquisition, design finalisation or financing. |
| Hydropower developers | Project design and appraisal would need to account for ecological flow, cumulative impact, inter-project distance and river-basin limits. |
| EIA-scheduled projects | Projects not expressly prohibited could still face deeper cumulative-impact and development-need assessments before environmental clearance. |
| Businesses using forest land | The approval process would involve greater public transparency and closer attention to Forest Rights Act and Gram Sabha consent requirements. |
| Existing EC, forest clearance, CTE or CTO holders | Annual regulatory monitoring would increase the importance of compliance records, environmental performance and corrective action. |
Because the proposed area and boundaries remain open to change, premature conclusions can create two opposite risks: abandoning a project that is outside the final ESA or continuing investment without recognising that the site may fall within it.
For multi-location, or land-intensive projects, environmental compliance services can bring boundary review, industry classification, approval history and proposed operating restrictions into one decision-ready assessment.
For multi-location or land-intensive projects, environmental compliance services can bring boundary review, industry classification, approval history and proposed operating restrictions into one decision-ready assessment.
What Affected Businesses Should Do During the 60-Day Consultation
The following are practical recommendations. They are not additional legal duties created by the draft.
- Check the proposed location carefully: Compare the site coordinates, revenue village, taluka, district and available cadastral or survey information with Annexures B and C. Kerala projects should also examine the boundary material referred to on the Kerala State Biodiversity Board website.
- Identify the relevant activity category: Determine whether the project involves mining, thermal power, a Red-, Orange- or White-category industry, threshold-based construction, hydropower, an EIA-scheduled activity or forest-land diversion.
- Review project status and approval history: If relying on the pre-17 April 2013 exception verify when the competent appraisal body received the proposal, and whether it remains pending. A general project commencement date is not the test stated in the draft.
- Record boundary or schedule discrepancies: Errors involving village names, duplicate entries, bifurcation status, survey details or coordinates should be supported with official land records, maps and precise location information.
- Assess pipeline exposure: Before making major commitments, review planned expansion, land purchases, funding plans and the approval process in light of the proposed restrictions.
- Submit a focused representation where necessary: Define the issue clearly and include documents or other reliable information to support your point.
- Continue complying with existing approvals: The draft does not suspend existing environmental clearance, forest clearance, Consent to Establish, Consent to Operate or other regulatory obligations while consultation is pending.
How Corpseed’s Environmental Compliance Services Can Support Affected Projects
Corpseed can provide environmental compliance services to businesses, landowners and project developers that need to understand how the proposed ESA may affect a site or activity.
Relevant support may include:
- Reviewing the draft notification, state maps, village schedules and project coordinates for preliminary applicability.
- Coordinating a survey- or cadastral-record-based boundary review with appropriate technical inputs.
- Assessing proposed activities against the mining, industrial, construction, hydropower, EIA and forest-diversion provisions.
- Helping prepare a clear, evidence-based objection or suggestion for submission during the consultation period.
- Conducting an environmental compliance gap assessment for existing environmental clearance, forest clearance, CTE and CTO conditions.
- Providing environmental clearance consultant support for applicable environmental permissions and project requirements.
- Providing pollution control consent consultant support for applicable Consent to Establish and Consent to Operate requirements.
- Providing environmental audit services to review existing compliance records, approval conditions and environmental obligations.
- Supporting technical documentation and ongoing compliance management.
Professional review cannot change a ban or guarantee approval. It can help identify issues early and prepare projects for the final rules.
Businesses requiring a site-specific review can consult Corpseed as a regulatory compliance consultant for the proposed Western Ghats ESA boundary, applicable project category and existing approval conditions.
Key Takeaway
The Western Ghats ESA Draft Notification 2026 proposes to cover 56,825.7 square kilometres across six states. It also proposes restrictions on mining, industries, construction and some other activities.
The notification is still in draft form, so these rules are not final yet. The proposed area may also change after the government reviews suggestions and objections.
Businesses and other affected parties should check the village and boundary details and raise any genuine errors during the consultation period. They should also review how the proposed rules could affect their projects if the notification is finalised.
About the Author
Parul Bohral
Legal Content WriterParul Bohral, a BALLB graduate and experienced legal researcher and content writer with expertise in various legal areas, including corporate law and intellectual property. I have gained valuable experience in esteemed legal environments, where I have strengthened my research skills, allowing me to approach legal writing with precision and depth.
As a legal content writer, I am committed to delivering work that not only informs but also engages readers. By staying informed about the latest trends in content marketing and regulatory developments, I ensure that my writing remains sophisticated and meets industry standards. My dedication to thorough research enables me to craft content that is both insightful and impactful.