The main legal principle established is the need for a purposive construction of the National Environmental Appellate Authority Act, 1997 to recognize the standing of individuals or associations of persons working for the betterment of the environment as 'aggrieved persons' under Section 11(2)(c) of the Act.

S. Ravindra Bhat, J.

1. The writ petitioner challenges an order dated 29.1.2008 of the National Environmental Appellate Authority (hereafter, the Authority) dismissing his appeal stating that he is not a "person aggrieved" under Section 11 of the National Environmental Appellate Authority Act, 1997 (hereafter, the Act).

2. The petitioner, claiming to be a social and environmental activist, preferred the appeal in his personal capacity as the President of a Social Organisation viz. Lok Shakti Abhiyan, Orissa Unit under Section 11(1) of the Act, challenging an order granting environmental clearance, on 7.3.2007, issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forests (hereafter, the MoEF), Central Government, for setting up of Alumina Smelter Plant (2,50,000 TPA) based on pre-baked technology at Village Bhurkamunda/Brundamal, District Jharsuguda, Orissa by the third respondent.

3. The petitioner claims to be a social and environmental activist involved in issues concerning tribals and environment and also is the President of the Orissa Unit of Lok Shakti Abhiyan, an organization dedicated to social and environmental causes. It is claimed that together with his group, he has been closely following environmental issues in Brundamal District, Jahrsuguda, Orissa and is working among the affected communities.

4. The background of the case is that the second respondent i.e. Orissa State Pollution Control Board announced a public hearing on 20.10.2005 for a proposed aluminum smelter plant under the provisions of Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) Notification, 1994. The petitioner objected to the public hearing on the ground that this is not a separate project but a third stage of a Bauxite Mining Project. The public hearing was cancelled and rescheduled for a later date on 9.12.2005. The petitioner made another representation challenging the faulty EIA of the project on 9.12.2005, inter alia stating the following:

The Public Hearing for this Aluminum Smelter, an integral part of Vedantas bauxite miming, alumina refinery and aluminum smelting project which is currently sub judice is legally wrong. State Pollution Control Board is going ahead with the Public Hearing without taking into account the recommendations of the Central Empowerment Committee to the Supreme Court of India which show that Vedanta has violated forest and conservation laws.

It may be recalled that the CEC in its recommendation to the Apex Court had asked for the withdrawal of the environmental clearance to the alumina refinery plant located in Lanjigarh and strictly recommended not to give the Niyamgiri Hills for bauxite mining to the company. The three phases of an aluminum plant involves necessarily the first step of having captive bauxite mining which would provide raw material for the second step that is the alumina refinery that in turn will be supplied to aluminum smelter in the third step. The following situation prevails with regard to the above three steps, which are essentially part of the same project.

1. Bauxite mine: License for mining not granted. The CEC says "It is of considered view that the use of the forest land in an ecologically sensitive area like Niyamgiri Hills should not be permitted (para 32, page 52)" and again the CEC says "The project may only be considered after an alternative bauxite mine site is identified (para 33, page 53)"

2. Aluminum refinery: The observation of the CEC is significant on the alumina plant when it says "The casual approach, lackadaisical manner and the haste with which the entire issues of the forests and environmental clearance for the alumina refinery project has been dealt with smacks of undue favour/leniency and does not inspire confidence with regard to the willingness and resolve of both the state government and the MoEF to deal with such matters keeping in view the ultimate goal of national and public interest. In the instant case had a proper study been conducted before embarking on a project of this nat