Back
DIPANKAR DATTA, VIJAY BISHNOI
Rhythm County – Appellant
Versus
Satish Sanjay Hegde – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of civil appeals' origin (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. details of environmental violations by rhythm and keystone (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. contentions of the appellants regarding statutory compliance (Para 12 , 13) |
| 4. defense of ngt's findings as based on substantial evidence (Para 15 , 16) |
| 5. jurisprudence guiding ngt's powers and compensation mandates (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 6. application of environmental compensation standards in judicial precedents (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 7. implications of previously established legal precedents on current case (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37) |
| 8. summary of the court's decisions and order conclusions (Para 46 , 47 , 48 , 49) |
JUDGMENT :
THE APPEALS
2. The lead appeal has been filed by the project proponent, i.e., M/s. Rhythm County2[RHYTHM], challenging the order dated 22.08.2022 passed by the NGT in Original Application No. 14 of 2021 (WZ). Vide the impugned order, the NGT held that RHYTHM had violated the environmental norms and carried out construction without obtaining Environmental Clearance3[EC], for which it was liable in a sum of Rs. 5,00,00,000/- as compensation. Appellant was, accordingly, directed to pay suc
The court affirmed that environmental compensation must be proportionate to project size, asserting that the 'polluter pays' principle justifies significant fines for regulatory violations, despite t....
The Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board lacks authority to impose environmental compensation without legislative backing and established procedures. Judicial pronouncements dictate the need for s....
The Rajasthan State Pollution Control Board cannot impose Environmental Compensation without legislative authority, necessitating subordinate legislation for its calculation and imposition.
The National Green Tribunal retains exclusive jurisdiction to assess environmental compensation, and its orders cannot be stayed by writ jurisdiction.
The NGT must adhere to principles of natural justice and cannot abdicate its adjudicatory role to committees; fair hearing is essential in decisions regarding environmental compensations.
The court emphasized that penalties for environmental non-compliance must be based on sound legal principles and supported by evidence, ensuring adherence to natural justice.
(1) Observance of Principles of Natural Justice by NGT is mandatory.(2) Recommendations made by an Expert Committee are not binding on NGT – They are only by way of assistance to enable NGT to arrive....
Environmental compensation must adhere to principles of natural justice and proportionality, ensuring that penalties correlate with actual damage and supported by robust evidence.
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
