Under the vehicle scrappage framework notified by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, an RVSF must be established only on land that is legally permissible for industrial operations. Agricultural land, residential plots, or mixed-use land without proper conversion are routinely rejected at the Consent to Establish stage. Even where local practice is lenient, State Pollution Control Boards insist on documentary proof of industrial zoning or lawful land-use conversion before issuing approval.

Button

From a size perspective, there is no single pan-India minimum land area notified by MoRTH; however, in practice, most State authorities expect a minimum of 4,000 to 6,000 square meters to accommodate compliant dismantling operations. This area is not arbitrary—it must realistically support vehicle parking, depollution zones, dismantling bays, hazardous waste storage, internal roads, and firefighting access. Applications proposing smaller parcels often fail during site inspection because the approved layout cannot be implemented physically on the ground.

Equally critical is the layout and ground treatment of the land. Pollution authorities require impervious concrete flooring in dismantling and depollution areas to prevent soil contamination from oils, fuels, and coolants. Natural soil surfaces, broken flooring, or temporary sheets are treated as serious non-compliance. Proper drainage channels, oil-water separators, and rainwater protection are examined in relation to the actual slope and topography of the land, not just on paper. A mismatch between layout drawings and site conditions is a common reason for objection notices.

Location also plays a strategic role in land approval. RVSFs situated within notified industrial areas or industrial estates generally experience faster approvals and fewer objections. Sites located near residential zones, water bodies, schools, or eco-sensitive areas attract stricter scrutiny and, in some states, outright rejection. Accessibility for transport vehicles and emergency services is another factor assessed during inspection, making narrow approach roads or disputed access routes a latent compliance risk.

Ownership structure is less restrictive than many assume, but documentation must be precise. Both owned land and long-term leased land are acceptable, provided the lease clearly permits industrial use and has sufficient tenure to justify permanent infrastructure. Ambiguous lease clauses or short-term agreements weaken the application and raise concerns during regulatory review.

In commercial terms, land selection directly influences project viability. Choosing cheaper but non-compliant land often leads to prolonged approval timelines, repeated inspections, and redesign costs that far exceed any initial savings. Experienced operators treat land acquisition not as a real estate decision, but as a regulatory investment that determines the speed, stability, and scalability of the RVSF.

In summary, RVSF land requirements are not limited to size alone. Legal land use, minimum practical area, compliant flooring and drainage, location sensitivity, and documentary clarity together determine approval success. Operators who align land planning with compliance expectations from day one avoid the most expensive mistakes in the RVSF lifecycle