Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, A.S. BOPANNA, JJ.
Talli Gram Panchayat - Appellant
Versus
Union of India and Others - Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos.383-384 of 2022
Decided on : 11-07-2022
NGT - Environmental Clearance - NGT Act - Section 16, NGT Act 2010 - Section 4(4)(c) - Environment Impact Assessment Notification - Save Mon Region Federation v. Union of India, 2013 (1) All India NGT Reporter 1 - Rule 3 of the 2011 Rules - Notification GSR No. 1473(E) - Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change - National Green Tribunal (Practice and Procedure) Rules 2011 - Rule 3(1) - Single Member Bench - Natural Justice - Constitution of Bench - Equal Number of Judicial and Expert Members
Fact of the Case:
The appellant challenged the grant of environmental clearance to Ultratech Cement Limited by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. The appellant sought condonation of delay in filing the appeal, contending that the environment clearance was not accessible and downloadable to the public. The National Green Tribunal dismissed the applications for recall of the order and for condonation of delay, citing lack of diligence and knowledge of the grant of environmental clearance as reasons for rejection.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the single member of the National Green Tribunal could not have dealt with the proceedings and dismissed the applications for restoration and for condonation of delay after the Attorney General of India had assured the Court that the proviso to Rule 3 would be rectified. The Court held that the constitution of a single member bench was in contravention of Section 4(4)(c) of the NGT Act 2010.
Issues: The issues involved the accessibility and downloadability of the environment clearance to the public, the constitution of a single member bench in contravention of the NGT Act, and the violation of principles of natural justice.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the single member of the NGT could not have passed an order in view of the proviso to Section 4(4)(c) of the NGT Act 2010, which mandates that the number of expert members hearing the appeal or application shall be equal to the number of judicial members.
Final Decision: The appeals were allowed, and the impugned order of the NGT was set aside. The original order of the NGT was restored for disposal afresh, and all the rights and contentions of the parties, including on the issue of limitation, were kept open. The Court expressed no opinion on the merits of the appeals.
JUDGMENT :
DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.
1. These appeals arise from an order dated 16 July 2021 of the National Green Tribunal1[“NGT”]. The appellant challenged the grant of an environmental clearance to Ultratech Cement Limited2[“fourth respondent”] by a letter dated 5 January 2017. The NGT by the impugned judgment dismissed the applications to recall the order of a single member and for condonation of delay.
2. By a letter dated 5 January 2017, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change3[“MoEFCC”] granted an environment clearance to the fourth respondent for limestone mining with a total production capacity of 0.53 million tonnes per annum at villages Talli and Bambor situated in Taluka Talenja, of the District of Bhavnagar in the State of the Gujarat. The fourth respondent served a copy of the environment clearance upon the Talathi-Cum-Mantri of the Gram Panchayat on 12 January 2017 through a letter dated 9 January 2017. The fourth respondent also issued a public notice on the grant of the environmental clearance on 11 January 2017 in Gujarati in “Saurashtra Samachar” and in English, in “Gujarat Samachar”. The appellant challenged4[Appeal No. 36 of 2017] the environmental clearance which was granted to the fourth respondent under Section 16 of the NGT Act on several grounds including the following:
b) Out of the total area of 193.3269 Ha., 155.3269 a is the private agricultural land. The consent of all the land holders, mandatory under the Mines and Minerals Developments Act has not been obtained by the Project Proponent. Such, land holders have also not been given any opportunity in the process, while the decision affects their land rights protected under Art. 300A of the Constitution.
c) The area falls within the catchment area of four bandharas, proposed to be constructed to provide for water for irrigation and drinking.
d) The mining if permitted would have severe effect of environment and ecology and also the life and livelihood of the villagers.”
3. The appellant obtained leave to file an application for condonation of delay5[MA 262 of 2017 in Appeal No. 36 of 2017] since the appeal was filed beyond the prescribed period of 30 days. The fourth respondent contended that the notice was published in the newspapers on 11 January 2017 and the letter was served upon the Talathi-cum-Mantri on 12 January 2017 and therefore, the period of limitation must be calculated from these dates. However, the appellant contended that the publication was not in conformity with the statutory requirements under Clause 10 of the Environment Impact Assessment Notification as interpreted in Save Mon Region Federation v. Union of India, 2013 (1) All India NGT Reporter 1. The appellant argued that the environment clearance certificate must be uploaded on the website and has to be accessible and downloadable to the public. The appeal along with the application for condonation of delay was heard on 24 November 2017. In view of the position of law in Save Mon Region Federation (supra), the Tribunal sought a clarification on whether the environment clearance which was uploaded on the website was accessible to and could have been downloaded by the public.
4. On 1 December 2017, the MoEFCC introduced an amendment to the National Green Tribunal (Practice and Procedure) Rules 20117[“2011 rules”] by Notification GSR No. 1473(E) 8[“notification”]. By the Notification, a proviso was inserted in Rule 3 of the 2011 Rules which allowed the constitution of single member Benches in exceptional circumstances. Rule 3 of the 2011 Rules, as amended by the notification reads as follows:
[Provided tha
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the constitution of a single member bench in contravention of the NGT Act 2010, and the violation of principles of natural justice, rendered t....
Points of law : Given mandate of the NGT Act, exercise of discretion, as was done in this case, to reject appeal by dismissing application for condonation of delay, on ground that no sufficient cause....
NGT liberally condones 53-day delay in Pollution Control Board's appeal due to bona fide administrative procedures, emphasizing substantial justice in environmental matters over hyper-technical limit....
The National Green Tribunal must consider internal procedures of authorities as sufficient cause for delay in filing appeals when it pertains to environmental matters.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of adhering to environmental regulations, the jurisdiction of the NGT, and the limitation period for challenging environmental clear....
The court emphasized the importance of adherence to the principles of natural justice and the right to be heard, especially in cases involving civil consequences, and highlighted the violation of the....
NGT lacks jurisdiction under Ss.14/15 to challenge time-barred ECs appealable under S.16; no appellate power indirectly.
NGT cannot condone delay beyond 30 days for restoration using Section 151 CPC, as it overrides mandatory statutory limits under NGT Act and Rules.
The NGT cannot delegate its core adjudicatory functions to administrative expert committees and must adjudicate on environmental issues within its jurisdiction.
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
