Environment · 2 Aug 2026

EIA Notification 2006

Consider the following Assertion (A) and Reason (R): Assertion (A): The Supreme Court held that a fresh public consultation was legally mandatory before granting Environmental Clearance to MAHAGENCO's Gare Palma Sector-II coal mine, but it declined to halt ongoing mining operations. Reason (R): Under the EIA Notification, 2006, Category 'A' projects such as major coal mines are exempted from the public consultation requirement once mining operations have commenced. Select the correct answer using the codes given below:

ABoth A and R are true and R is the correct explanation of A
BBoth A and R are true but R is NOT the correct explanation of A
CA is true but R is false
DA is false but R is true

Tests the ability to distinguish a court's actual stated legal rationale from a plausible but fabricated statutory provision that does not exist.

Subscribe / Login in App →
This question is based on: SC Orders Fresh Hearing for Coal Mine EC, But Lets Mining Continue
Take this in full test mode → Instructions for 2 Aug 2026
About this question

Why in news

The Supreme Court ruled MAHAGENCO's coal mine required a fresh public hearing before Environmental Clearance but allowed mining to continue, citing substantial compliance despite the deficiency.

Why for UPSC

UPSC often uses Assertion-Reasoning to test whether aspirants can distinguish a court's actual stated rationale (substantial compliance) from a plausible-sounding but incorrect statutory explanation (an exemption clause) that does not exist.

Prelims summary

The EIA Notification, 2006 mandates public consultation for Category 'A' projects before clearance with no operational-status exemption; the Gare Palma mine's continued operation was permitted on "substantial compliance" grounds, not any legal exemption.

On web, answers are shown once after a test — no save or reattempt. For unlimited reattempts, Hindi medium, and Mentor Observations, use the TAN App.