JUDGMENT :

M.R. SHAH, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 23.05.2012 in Appeal No. 17/2011 and judgment and order dated 10.11.2014 in Appeal No. 50/2012 passed by the National Green Tribunal (Principal Bench), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NGT’), M/s IL&FS Tamil Nadu Power Company Limited has preferred the present appeals.

2. The facts leading to the present appeals in nutshell are as under:

The appellant herein has been incorporated in the year 2006 to implement the Project for establishing a 2x600 MW and 3x800 MW (aggregating to 3600 MW) imported coal based thermal power plant at village Kottatai, Ariyagoshti, Villianallur and Silambimangalam in Chidambram Taluk, District Cuddalore, Tamil Nadu. Now the appellant company is under the control of Government of India. The appellant submitted Form I under EIA Notification, 2006 to obtain Terms of Reference for the EIA study on 5.2.2008. The Terms of Reference approval letter was issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (hereinafter referred to as the ‘MoEF’) on 9.7.2008. Public hearing was carried out for the project on 5.2.2010. The appellant completed the EIA study in accordance with EIA Notification, 2006. That thereafter the Expert Appraisal Committee (for short, ‘EAC’) considered the EIA study and directed the appellant to undertake certain additional submissions to address specific points and directed that an updated Form I be submitted. That thereafter the appellant submitted updated Form I reflecting recommendations of EAC meeting dated 19.03.2010 to MoEF. The EAC meeting considered the project and recommended the project for Environment Clearance (for short, ‘EC’), subject to stipulation of specific conditions including project to keep space for providing Flue Gas De-sulfurization (for short, ‘FGD’) system with all the five units of the power plant to enable the system to be installed whenever required. The appellant herein was granted the EC in accordance with the recommendations of the EAC under EIA Notification, 2006.

2.1 The original petitioners claiming to be fishermen and persons acting for welfare of fishermen filed appeals against the EC before National Environment Appellate Authority being NEAA Appeal Nos. 19 & 20 of 2010. On the constitution of the NGT, Appeal No. 20/2010 filed before the National Environment Appellate Authority came to be transferred to the NGT, which was re-numbered as Appeal Nos. 16/2011 & 17/2011.

2.2 Vide order dated 23.05.2012 in Appeal No. 17/2011, the NGT upheld the validity of the EC but directed the MoEF to review the EC based on the cumulative impact assessment study and stipulate any additional conditions, if required and directed that till then the EC shall remain suspended. Instead of the cumulative impact assessment study, the appellant completed the Rapid Cumulative Impact Assessment (for short, ‘RCIA’) study and submitted a copy thereof to the MoEF. That thereafter the EAC, after extensive deliberations on the RCIA and after hearing the representative of the original petitioners and the appellant/project proponent, recommended certain additional conditions to be added to the EC including the requirement of installing a FGD system as part of the power plant. At this stage, it is required to be noted that as such neither the original petitioners nor even the appellant challenged the first judgment and order dated 23.05.2012 passed in Appeal No. 17/2011 by which the NGT upheld the validity of the EC but directed MoEF to review the EC based on the cumulative impact assessment study and stipulate any additional conditions, if required. That thereafter, on 14.08.2012, MoEF based on the recommendations of the EAC, issued a corrigendum to the EC imposing additional conditions to the EC. That thereafter the original petitioners who filed the earlier appeal against the grant of EC, filed Appeal No. 50/2012 against the corrigendum dated 14.08.2012 issued by the