In India’s ecological defines landscape, Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has become a game-changing legal tool that has radically changed the way environmental justice is sought and attained. PIL has enabled individuals, groups, and environmental activists to directly petition the court on behalf of public issues since the 1980s, eschewing the conventional legal standing criteria that hitherto impeded environmental campaigning. Through historic cases like Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India, T.N. Goda Varman Thirumulpad v. Union of India, and M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Ganga Pollution Case), the Indian judiciary especially the Supreme Court and High Courts has used PIL to broaden environmental jurisprudence. These rulings interpreted Article 21 of the Constitution to include the basic right to a clean and healthy environment, and they developed important environmental doctrines such as the Polluter Pays Principle, Precautionary Principle, and Public Trust Doctrine. Courts may now issue comprehensive directives for pollution control, forest conservation, and sustainable development because to PIL’s facilitation of judicial activism in environmental protection. The system, which frequently fills in where the legislative and executive institutions have failed, has proven crucial in resolving issues such as industrial pollution, deforestation, mining infractions, and wildlife preservation. But there are issues with environmental PIL, including as a lack of enforcement, the possibility of abuse, and the need to strike a balance between ecological preservation and growth. Notwithstanding these drawbacks, PIL continues to be a vital component of environmental governance in India, offering easily accessible justice for rights to the environment and encouraging responsibility from government officials and polluting corporations.