The Supreme Court on Thursday permitted the Taj Trapezium Zone (TTZ) Authority to process around 400 pending applications for setting up industries in the protected area around the Taj Mahal, holding that delays in completing environmental studies cannot indefinitely hold up decisions on such proposals.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohan directed that the applications may be considered subject to a scrutiny mechanism involving experts from the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) and the Central Empowered Committee (CEC).

"We, therefore, direct that the TTZ Authority may process the pending applications," the Bench ordered.

The court clarified that applications may be approved without seeking its permission where the TTZ Authority, NEERI and the CEC experts are unanimous that the proposed unit is non-polluting. However, if either the NEERI or CEC expert concludes that an industry is polluting, the proposal cannot be cleared unless the Supreme Court grants approval.

To ensure transparency, the Bench directed that every decision clearing an application be uploaded on the CEC website to invite objections or suggestions from the public before a final decision is taken.

The directions were issued in proceedings concerning the court's earlier orders prohibiting polluting industries within the 10,400 sq km Taj Trapezium Zone, created to protect the Taj Mahal and other heritage monuments from environmental degradation.

Appearing for the Centre, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati submitted that a blanket restriction on new industries was adversely affecting livelihoods. She informed the court that about 400 applications, largely relating to MSMEs rather than heavy industries, were awaiting consideration.

"No heavy industries are being considered here. Only MSME industries are being considered. We have around 400 applications pending for such industries. We have sought to process those applications. How do we curb the aspirations of millions of people? A complete ban on new industries is impacting," she said.

Senior Advocate Aparna Bhat pointed to instances where glass manufacturing units in Firozabad had allegedly received approvals despite environmental concerns.

"There was arbitrary sanction of industries in the Firozabad area where glass industries were working. MoEF had advised not to set up those industries... In one of their internal meetings, it was noted that such industries were still open," she submitted.

"There is some unanimity that only non-polluting industries should be allowed. One NEERI report says what are the non-polluting industries. We can form a committee with domain experts from CEC and NEERI who can take individual case-based decisions on which industry is polluting and which is not polluting, and then applications can be processed as it's a question of livelihood also," Justice Kant observed.

The court also referred to NEERI's interim report of April 21, 2025, which cautioned against adopting a rigid definition of "non-polluting industries". According to the report, limiting the definition solely to Central Pollution Control Board standards could impede the region's economic development. Instead, NEERI suggested that factors such as Agra's heritage value, traditional industries and geographical indication (GI) status should also be considered.

Accordingly, the Bench held that pending applications could be processed even though the cumulative impact assessment study and NEERI's final report on defining non-polluting industries are still awaited.

It further directed that no meeting to consider such applications should take place unless both the NEERI and CEC experts are present. Where the experts disagree on whether an industry qualifies as non-polluting, the proposal must be placed before the Supreme Court. If both experts, along with the TTZ Authority, unanimously approve an application, it may be processed to its logical conclusion in accordance with law without requiring further approval from the court.

The Bench added that any objections or suggestions received after publication of approvals on the CEC website must be considered by the TTZ Authority in consultation with the experts before taking a final decision.