NGT Takes Suo Motu Cognizance of Hanging Glacier Risks in Central Himalaya

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has taken suo motu cognizance of the environmental risks posed by unstable hanging glaciers in the Central Himalaya, observing that the issue raises substantial questions relating to environmental protection, statutory compliance, and the growing vulnerability of ecologically sensitive regions due to climate-induced changes and human expansion.

A Bench comprising Justice Prakash Shrivastava (Chairperson) and Dr. Afroz Ahmad (Expert Member), sitting at the Principal Bench in New Delhi, registered Original Application No. 258/2026 on the basis of a news report and held that the material placed on record prima facie indicates violations of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.

The Tribunal issued notices to multiple authorities, directing them to file their responses by way of affidavits prior to the next date of hearing, while also listing the matter for further consideration on August 6, 2026.

The proceedings arose from a news item published in The Hindu on April 20, 2026, which highlighted a scientific study examining the risks associated with hanging glaciers located on steep mountain slopes in the Central Himalayan region.

The study, conducted by researchers from premier institutions including the Indian Institute of Science (IISc), Bengaluru, the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT), Bhubaneswar, and the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO), focused on the Alaknanda basin in Uttarakhand, a critical headstream of the Ganga river system.

According to the report, these hanging glaciers, destabilised due to glacial retreat and changing climatic conditions, are prone to sudden mass shedding in the form of snow or ice avalanches.

While such processes are natural, the Tribunal noted that their occurrence near expanding human settlements and infrastructure significantly enhances the risk of disasters.

The study warned that avalanche flows, in worst-case scenarios, could reach populated areas such as Badrinath, Mana, and Hanuman Chatti, thereby posing a serious threat to life and property.

The material placed before the Tribunal further indicated that rapid and unregulated development in high-altitude regions has aggravated the situation.

Built-up areas within vulnerable zones have reportedly expanded from approximately 8,000 square metres in 2000 to projections exceeding 150,000 square metres by 2030.

This sharp increase in exposure, particularly along the Badrinath-Mana corridor, underscores the intersection of environmental fragility and developmental pressures in the region.

Taking note of these findings, the Tribunal observed that the issues raised in the news report are not merely academic but have direct implications for environmental governance and disaster preparedness.

It held that the matter attracts the provisions of environmental law and warrants examination in light of statutory obligations to prevent ecological degradation and safeguard human settlements in vulnerable zones.

In invoking its suo motu jurisdiction, the Tribunal relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court of India in Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai vs. Ankita Sinha & Ors., which affirmed the NGT’s authority to initiate proceedings independently on the basis of credible information, including media reports, where substantial environmental issues are involved.

Accordingly, the Tribunal impleaded key governmental and regulatory bodies as respondents, including the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), the Uttarakhand Tourism Development Board, the National Mission for Clean Ganga (NMCG), the Department of Urban Development, Uttarakhand, and the National Institute of Hydrology, Roorkee.

These authorities have been called upon to respond to the concerns raised and to assist the Tribunal in assessing the extent of the risk and the adequacy of existing regulatory and mitigation measures.

The Tribunal also clarified that any respondent choosing to file its reply directly, without routing it through legal counsel, must remain virtually present to assist in the proceedings, indicating the seriousness with which it intends to pursue the matter.

The case has been directed to be listed along with a connected matter for further hearing on August 6, 2026, suggesting that the Tribunal may consider broader issues relating to environmental risks and regulatory oversight in the Himalayan region.

Case Title: News Item titled “Study Flags Overlooked Danger Posed By Hanging Glaciers On Mountain Slopes in Central Himalaya”

Bench: Justice Prakash Shrivastava (Chairperson) and Dr. Afroz Ahmad (Expert Member)

Date of Order: April 24, 2026