According to the passage, why is the Supreme Court sometimes referred to as “Lords of the Green Bench”?

Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the question.

Beginning during the late 1980’s, the Indian Supreme Court has been actively engaged in the environmental concerns that face the country. While in many countries, this aspect is done through either the executive or legislative branch, in India, this is the role of the Supreme Court. Because of this, the Supreme Court of India has been engaged in both the interpretation and introduction of new changes in environmental law. The Court has enacted new principles to protect the environment as well as to reinterpret existing laws. It has also created new organisations as well as conferred additional powers on existing organisations through directives and judgments.
The Court directions on issues related to the environment go well beyond questions about law. These include executive actions and technical details of environmental actions to be implemented. The Court’s involvement has engendered criticism, both positive and negative, in which they are heralded as pioneering while at the same time as their directives are based on their discretion solely they are referred to as “Lords of the Green Bench”.
The reasons are complex for the increased involvement of the Supreme Court. One major factor is because government agencies and state-owned businesses have failed to follow regulatory guidelines. As a result, this has prompted many NGOs to file public interest complaints within the Courts, especially with the Supreme Court.
Public interest litigation is not only the province of the Supreme Court. This type of litigation as well as judicial activism on environmental issues takes place in the High Courts of individual states.
Judicial activism has delivered positive effects for India. Many supporters claim that the Supreme Court has become a symbol of hope. This has resulted in the delivery of a normative regime of rights and the insistence that no Indian state can act arbitrarily, but must act reasonably and in the public interest. It goes further to state that such action will be made invalid by judicial action.
While this is a positive step forward, India’s judicial activism has had several adverse consequences. First and foremost is the fact that many public interest cases are repeatedly filed to block projects to improve infrastructure that is aimed at solving environmental issues. These projects include water works, expressways, and acquisition of land for projects as well as power generation projects. This litigation routinely delays these projects, in many cases for years. During this delay, pollution continues and results in both illness and deaths related to pollution.
In several key cases, through judicial activism, it was found that statedevelo directed economic development was both ineffective and failed in the delivery of the development goals. Based on these assessments, the Court then interpreted laws and issued directives that encouraged greater competition and free market solutions to reduce pollution. On the other hand, in other cases, the interpretations and directions which the Court issued have actually preserved state-owned companies by preserving their labour practices and lack of regulation, which continue to be detrimental to the quality of India’s environment.