NGT Rules Rule 20(2)'s 30-day limit for restoring default-dismissed appeals is mandatory; no condonation of delay permitted. Inherent CPC Section 151 powers cannot override statutory time bars.

ORDER

1. This Interlocutory Application (IA) 243/2023 has been filed by the Applicant/Appellant seeking condonation of delay of 150 days in moving Miscellaneous Application (MA) No. 16/2023 which seeks restoration of the Appeal No. 24/2023 by setting aside the order dated 13.07.2023, whereby Appeal No. 24/2023 was dismissed for default.

2. In the body of that Application, it is submitted that the Applicant was not duly informed of the date of hearing nor did he have any other means to know about the date of hearing for admission of the Appeal. The appellant was solely dependent upon his counsel engaged at that time. The Appellant/Applicant was not able to keep track of the cause list as he was occupied with his personal responsibilities. The Appellant/Applicant came to know about the dismissal of the earlier Appeal at a much later date as the same was not communicated to him. Upon gaining knowledge of the dismissal, he approached the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in an appeal filed under Section 22 of National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as NGT Act) to seek restoration of the dismissed Appeal. On 24.11.2023, the Hon‟ble Supreme Court was pleased to grant liberty to the Applicant to approach this Tribunal to seek restoration of the dismissed appeal. A copy of the order dated 24.11.2023 passed by the Hon‟ble Apex Court which is attached as Annexure A2 at page 272 of the paper book.

3. The Respondent No. 5 Dr. FarrokhWadia, Designated Partner; Sagittarius Ecospaces LLP has filed an objection against the Interlocutory Application on 28.02.2024, wherein it is submitted by him that the Applicant is a serial litigator who has been filing cases against answering respondent with malafide intention. He has failed to clarify that he is a bona fide litigant and qualified to be called an „aggrieved person‟ under Section 18 of the NGT Act. The Appellant/Applicant is a resident of Mumbai while the project in question is located in the city of Pune and this is the 6^th round of litigation being initiated by the Appellant/Applicant.

4. Further it is submitted by Respondent No. 5 in his objection, that the Appeal was preferred on 16.05.2023 by the Appellant/Applicant under Section 16 read with Section 18 of the NGT Act, against the Environmental Clearance (EC) dated 29.08.2022 issued by the Respondent No. 2 - State Environment Impact Assessment Authority, Maharashtra (SEIAA) to Respondent No. 5 for Residential Cum Commercial Project named Bellrue at FP No. 3/3 & FP No. 70/11, Nagar Road, Yeravada, Pune, which was prayed to be quashed. Therefore the present Application for restoration stands barred by limitation and the appeal which has been filed 260 days after the issuance of the given EC is also beyond the period of limitation under Section 16 of the NGT Act.

5. Further it is pointed out by Respondent No. 5 in his objection to the Interlocutory Application No 243/2023 that the present application for restoration of the Appeal along with the Application for condonation of delay is hopelessly time barred as per the provision of the NGT Act read with Rule 20(2) of the National Green Tribunal (Practices and Procedure) Rules, 2011. (hereinafter referred to as „NGT Rules‟)

6. The said Appeal No. 24/2023(WZ), which was filed on 16.05.2023, was dismissed by this Tribunal on 13.07.2023 due to the non-appearance of the Appellant/Applicant or any of his representative, after providing sufficient opportunity for appearance. After the p