Back
NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI (PRINCIPAL BENCH)
Prakash Shrivastava, Chairperson, Arun Kumar Tyagi, Judicial Member, A. Senthil Vel, Expert Member
Haryana State Pollution Control Board – Appellant
Versus
Malibu Estate Pvt Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal challenges appellate authority's order setting aside closure directions (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. dispute over delay calculation from order date vs communication (Para 3 , 4 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. parties argue condonability of delay due to administrative procedures (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. limitation runs from communication; 30+60 days condonable (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. internal administrative processes justify 53-day delay (Para 12 , 13) |
| 6. liberal approach to condone delays in environmental appeals (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 7. respondent's counterarguments distinguished; no substantial defects (Para 20 , 21 , 27) |
| 8. cited cases inapplicable due to differing facts and delays (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 9. delay condoned; appeal admitted for merits hearing (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
ORDER
1. This appeal at the instance of Haryana State Pollution Control Board (HSPCB) has been filed under Section 16(a)(f) and 18 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 (NGT Act, 2010) read with Section 33- B (a) of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (Water Act, 1974) and Section 31-B of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 (Air Act, 1981) challenging the order dat
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
