Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Madan B. Lokur, Deepak Gupta,
Techi Tagi Tara – Appellant
versus
Rajendra Singh Bhandari & Ors. – Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1359 OF 2017 WITH C.A. No. 1360/2017, C.A. No. 2481/2017 , C.A. No. 526/2017, C.A. No. 1561/2017 , C.A. No. 4917/2017, C.A. No. 4936/2017, C.A. No. 5735/2017, C.A. Nos. 8377-8378/2017, C.A. No. 10471/2017, C.A. No. 9498/2017 and C.A. Nos. 10472-10473/2017
Decided On : 22-09-2017
(b) National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 – Section 14, 15, 2(m) – Jurisdiction – Adjudicating substantial questions relating to environment arising in a dispute – Dispute, raised by a claimant, must be capable of settlement by NGT by grant of some compensation or restitution of property – Appointment of Chairperson and members of the SPCBs not such a question – Such appointment could be dispute for a constitutional court to resolve through a writ of quo warranto – But NGT has no jurisdiction to venture into such question – NGT could not entertain such question – At best it could direct the pretties to approach a constitutional court. (Para 17, 18, 19, 21)
(2015) 15 SCC 1 – Relied upon
(c) Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 – Section 4(2) and 8 r/w section 5(2) and 10, Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and Articles 48A, 51A(g) and 21, Constitution of India – Appointment of Chairpersons and Members of SPCBs – The water and Air Acts and the Constitution providing ample guidelines for appointment of Chairperson and Members of SPCBs – It is not for NGT or even Supreme Court to lay down rules for such appointments – It is for the States/UTs for frame Rules under the Acts – Reports of various Committees also providing more than enough guidelines for making expert and professional appointments – NGT and Courts should exercise restraint I such matters – All States and UTs directed to frame appropriate guidelines or recruitment rules within six months. (Para 23, 30, 32, 33)
(1985) 4 SCC 417; (2007) 6 SCC 586 – Relied upon
Facts of the case:
This case concerns appointment of incompetent persons as Members and Chairpersons of State Pollution Control Boards. The National Green Tribunal while expressing its anguish over non application of mind in selecting Members and Chairpersons of State Pollution Control Boards and issued directions and guidelines.
Finding of the Court:
NGT exceeded its jurisdiction in giving directions and guidelines.
Result: Appeals disposed of.
JUDGMENT
Madan B. Lokur, J.
1. This batch of appeals is directed against the judgment and order dated 24th August, 2016 passed by the National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (for short ‘the NGT’) in Original Application No. 318 of 2013, Rajendra Singh Bhandari v. State of Uttarakhand and others. On a reading of the judgment and order passed by the NGT, it is quite clear that the Tribunal was perturbed and anguished that some persons appointed to the State Pollution Control Boards (for short ‘SPCBs’) did not have, according to the NGT, the necessary expertise or qualifications to be members or chairpersons of such high powered and specialized statutory bodies and therefore did not deserve their appointment or nomination. While we fully commiserate with the NGT and share the pain and anguish, we are of the view that the Tribunal has, at law, exceeded its jurisdiction in directing the State Governments to reconsider the appointments and in laying down guidelines for appointment to the SPCBs, however well-meaning they might be. Therefore, we set aside the decision of the NGT, but note that a large number of disconcerting facts have been brought out in the judgment which need serious consideration by those in authority, particularly the State Governments that make appointments or nominations to the SPCBs. Such appointments should not be made casually or without due application of mind considering the duties, functions and responsibilities of the SPCBs.
2. Why is it important to be more than careful in making such appointments? There can be no doubt that the protection and preservation of the environment is extremely vital for all of us and unless this responsibility is taken very seriously, particularly by the State Governments and the SPCBs, we are inviting trouble that will have adverse consequences for future generations. Issues of sustainable development, public trust and intergenerational equity are not mere catch words, but are concepts of great importance in environmental jurisprudence. Perhaps appreciating and anticipating this, Article 48A was introduced in the Constitution and this Article reads as follows:
“Protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding of forests and wild life - The State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country.”
Similarly Article 51A (g) of the Constitution indicates the fundamental duties of every citizen of the country, one of them being to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life, and to have compassion for living creatures [51A. Fundamental duties.—It shall be the duty of every citizen of India—
(a) to (f) xxx xxx xxx
(g) to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life, and to have compassion for living creatures;
(h) to (k) xxx xxx xxx].It is quite clear that apart from the natural law obligation to protect and preserve the environment, there is also a constitutional obligation to do so. Unfortunately, despite this, our society has been witnessing over the last few decades, to repeated onslaughts against the environment, sometimes in the name of development and sometimes because our society just does not seem to care. In this context we may also mention Article 21 of the Constitution which has been given a very wide amplitude by several decisions of this Court, including on issues concerning the environment. The judgment of the NGT draws attention to some of these aspects but essentially points to the ‘who-cares’ attitude adopted by several State Governments. It is this attitude that compelled a public spirited environmentally conscious individual to challenge the composition of the SPCB in the State of Uttarakhand and consequently the necessity of being extra careful in making appointments to the SPCB.
3. One of the principal attributes of good governance is the establishment of viable institutions comprisi
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
