The main legal point established in the judgment is that the dismissal of writ petitions by the High Court on the ground of an alternate remedy does not preclude the petitioner from approaching the National Green Tribunal, and the petitioner should be given an opportunity to do so. The court also emphasized the provision in Section 16(j) of the National Green Tribunal Act, which allows for the filing of an appeal within a further period not exceeding sixty days if the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the initial thirty days.

ORDER

R. Banumathi, J. - By an order dated 24th August, 2018, the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA) passed an order of demolition of structures under Section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 which was challenged by the petitioner in W.P. No.991/2018 before the High Court. Being aggrieved by another order dated 20 th September, 2018 passed by the said Authority (GCZMA), the petitioner has also filed W.P. No.1069/2018. Both the writ petitions were dismissed by the High Court by a common Order dated 1st December, 2018 by observing that the petitioner is to approach the National Green Tribunal challenging the orders passed against her.

2. The petitioner thereafter filed miscellaneous applications before the High Court seeking extension of time for approaching the National Green Tribunal which were rejected by the High Court by Order dated 28th January, 2019. Both orders i.e. 1st December, 2018 and 28th January, 2019 are impugned in these special leave petitions.

3. Section 16 of the National Green Tribunal Act 2010 deals with the appellate jurisdiction of the Tribunal. In terms of Section 16(j) of the said Act any person aggrieved by an order may within a period of thirty days from the date on which the order or decision or direction or determination is communicated to him, prefer an appeal to the Tribunal. As per proviso to Section 16(j) of the Act, the Tribunal on being satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the said period, allow it to be filed within a further period not exceeding sixty days.

4. Mr. Dhruv Mehta, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, has submitted that the time stipulated under Section 16(j) of the said Act is ninety days (30 days + 60 days). It was submitted that since the High Court had entertained the writ petitions and subsequently disposed of the same with direction to approach the Tribunal, the petitioner cannot be rendered remediless on the point of limitation. It was submitted that the High Court ought to have extended the time to approach the National Green Tribunal challenging the orders of the authorities in this regard. In support of his contention Mr. Dhruv Mehta has drawn our attention to an order passed by this Court on 15 th January, 2018 in Civil Appeal NO.389 of 2018, Aman Sethi v. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

5. We find substance in the submission of Mr.Dhruv Mehta, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner. Inasmuch as the High Court has not gone into the merits of the matter, in our view the petitioner ought to be given an opportunity to approach the Tribunal challenging the orders.

6. Having regard to the submission made at the Bar, we deem it appropriate to grant four weeks time from today to the petitioner for filing appeal(s) before the National Green Tribunal. Ordered accordingly.

7. The High Court while dismissing the writ petitions on the ground of an alternate remedy, has extended the interim order operating in favour of the petitioner, as such we order to continue such orders for a further period of four weeks or till the appeal(s) is taken up by the National Green Tribunal, whichever is earlier.

8. The special leave petitions are accordingly disposed of.

9. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion either on the contentions raised by the petitioner or the merits of the appeal(s).

10. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.