SHRI VILE PARLE KELAVANI MANDAL'S

. JITENDRA CHAUHAN COLLEGE OF LAW

NAME OF THE STUDENT: HARSHAL HASMUKH SAVLA

ROLL NO. : 119
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL LAW
TOPIC: NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
SUBMITTED TO: DR.PRIYA J. SHAH
ADV. MINAL SHARMA

1
 INDEX

CONTENTS PAGE NO.

INTRODUCTION 3
STRUCTURE OF NGT 3
QUALIFICATIONS 3-4
APPOINTMENT 4
POWERS AND JURISDICTION 4-5
STRENGHTS AND CHALLENGES 6
IMPORTANT JUDGEMENTS 7-8

2
INTRODUCTION:

National Green Tribunal is a specialised body set up under the National Green Tribunal Act
(2010) for effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental protection
and conservation of forests and other natural resources.
With the establishment of the NGT, India became the third country in the world to set up a
specialised environmental tribunal, only after Australia and New Zealand, and the first
developing country to do so.
NGT is mandated to make disposal of applications or appeals finally within 6 months of
filing of the same.
The NGT has five places of sittings, New Delhi is the Principal place of sitting and Bhopal,
Pune, Kolkata and Chennai are the other four.

Structure of NGT:

The Tribunal comprises of the Chairperson, the Judicial Members and Expert Members. They
shall hold office for term of five years and are not eligible for reappointment.
The Chairperson is appointed by the Central Government in consultation with Chief Justice
of India (CJI).
A Selection Committee shall be formed by central government to appoint the Judicial
Members and Expert Members.
There are to be least 10 and maximum 20 full time Judicial members and Expert Members in
the tribunal.

Qualifications for appointment of Chairperson, Judicial Member and Expert Member.:

(1) A person shall not be qualified for appointment as the Chairperson or Judicial Member of
the Tribunal unless he is, or has been, a Judge of the Supreme Court of India or Chief Justice
of a High Court:
Provided that a person who is or has been a Judge of the High Court shall also be qualified to
be appointed as a Judicial Member
(2) A person shall not be qualified for appointment as an Expert Member, unless he,--

3
(a) has a degree in Master of Science (in physical sciences or life sciences) with a Doctorate
degree or Master of Engineering or Master of Technology and has an experience of fifteen
years in the relevant field including five years practical experience in the field of environment
and forests (including pollution control, hazardous substance management, environment
impact assessment, climate change management, biological diversity management and forest
conservation) in a reputed National level institution; or
(b) has administrative experience of fifteen years including experience of five years in
dealing with environmental matters in the Central or a State Government or in a reputed
National or State level institution.
(3) The Chairperson, Judicial Member and Expert Member of the Tribunal shall not hold any
other office during their tenure as such.
(4) The Chairperson and other Judicial and Expert Members shall not, for a period of two
years from the date on which they cease to hold office, accept any employment in, or
connected with the management or administration of, any person who has been a party to a
proceeding before the Tribunal under this Act:
Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply to any employment under the
Central Government or a State Government or local authority or in any statutory authority or
any corporation established by or under any Central, State or Provincial Act or a Government
company as defined in section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956).

Appointment of Chairperson, Judicial Member and Expert Member:

(1) Subject to the provisions of section 5, the Chairperson, Judicial Members and Expert
Members of the Tribunal shall be appointed by the Central Government.
(2) The Chairperson shall be appointed by the Central Government in consultation with the
Chief Justice of India.
(3) The Judicial Members and Expert Members of the Tribunal shall be appointed on the
recommendations of such Selection Committee and in such manner as may be prescribed.

Powers & Jurisdiction:

1.The Tribunal has jurisdiction over all civil cases involving substantial question relating to
environment (including enforcement of any legal right relating to environment).
2.Being a statutory adjudicatory body like Courts, apart from original jurisdiction side on
filing of an application, NGT also has appellate jurisdiction to hear appeal as a Court
(Tribunal).
3.The Tribunal is not bound by the procedure laid down under the Code of Civil Procedure
1908, but shall be guided by principles of 'natural justice'.

4
4.While passing any order/decision/ award, it shall apply the principles of sustainable
development, the precautionary principle and the polluter pays principle.
5.NGT by an order, can provide:
relief and compensation to the victims of pollution and other environmental damage
(including accident occurring while handling any hazardous substance),
for restitution of property damaged, and
for restitution of the environment for such area or areas, as the Tribunal may think fit.
An order/decision/award of Tribunal is executable as a decree of a civil court.

The NGT Act also provides a procedure for a penalty for non compliance:
Imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years,
Fine which may extend to ten crore rupees, and
Both fine and imprisonment
An appeal against order/decision/ award of the NGT lies to the Supreme Court, generally
within ninety days from the date of communication.

The NGT deals with civil cases under the seven laws related to the environment, these
include:
The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974,
The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977,
The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980,
The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981,
The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986,
The Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991 and
The Biological Diversity Act, 2002
Any violation pertaining to these laws or any decision taken by the Government under these
laws can be challenged before the NGT.

Appeal to Supreme Court:

Any person aggrieved by any award, decision or order of the Tribunal, may, file an appeal to
the Supreme Court, within ninety days from the date of communication of the award,
decision or order of the Tribunal, to him, on any one or more of the grounds specified in
section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908):

5
Provided that the Supreme Court may entertain any appeal after the expiry of ninety days, if
it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal.
Penalty for failure to comply with orders of Tribunal:

Strengths of NGT:

Over the years NGT has emerged as a critical player in environmental regulation, passing
strict orders on issues ranging from pollution to deforestation to waste management.
NGT offers a path for the evolution of environmental jurisprudence by setting up an
alternative dispute resolution mechanism.
It helps reduce the burden of litigation in the higher courts on environmental matters.
NGT is less formal, less expensive, and a faster way of resolving environment related
disputes.
It plays a crucial role in curbing environment-damaging activities.
The Chairperson and members are not eligible for reappointment, hence they are likely to
deliver judgements independently, without succumbing to pressure from any quarter.
The NGT has been instrumental in ensuring that the Environment Impact Assessment process
is strictly observed.

Challenges:

Two important acts - Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and Scheduled Tribes and Other
Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 have been kept out of
NGT’s jurisdiction. This restricts the jurisdiction area of NGT and at times hampers its
functioning as crucial forest rights issue is linked directly to environment.
The NGT decisions are being challenged in various High Courts under Article 226 (power of
High Courts to issue certain writs) with many asserting the superiority of a High Court over
the NGT, claiming ‘High Court is a constitutional body while NGT is a statutory body’.”
This is one of the weaknesses of the Act as there is lack of clarity about what kind of
decisions can be challenged; even though according to the NGT Act, its decision can be
challenged before the Supreme Court.

6
Decisions of NGT have also been criticised and challenged due to their repercussions on
economic growth and development.
The absence of a formula based mechanism in determining the compensation has also
brought criticism to the tribunal.
The decisions given by NGT are not fully complied by the stakeholders or the government.
Sometimes its decisions are pointed out not to be feasible to implement within a given
timeframe.
The lack of human and financial resources has led to high pendency of cases - which
undermines NGT’s very objective of disposal of appeals within 6 months.
The justice delivery mechanism is also hindered by limited number of regional benches.

Important Landmark Judgements of NGT:

In 2012, POSCO a steelmaker company signed a MoU with the Odisha government to set up
steel project. NGT suspended order and this was considered a radical step in favour of the
local communities and forests.
In 2012 Almitra H. Patel vs. Union of India case, NGT gave judgment of complete
prohibition on open burning of waste on lands, including landfills – regarded as the single
biggest landmark case dealing with the issue of solid waste management in India.
In 2013 in Uttarakhand floods case, the Alaknanda Hydro Power Co. Ltd. was ordered to
compensate to the petitioner – here, the NGT directly relied on the principle of ‘polluter
pays’.
In 2015, the NGT ordered that all diesel vehicles over 10 years old will not be permitted to
ply in Delhi-NCR.
In 2017, the Art of Living Festival on Yamuna Food Plain was declared violating the
environmental norms, the NGT panel imposed a penalty of Rs. 5 Crore.
The NGT, in 2017, imposed an interim ban on plastic bags of less than 50-micron thickness
in Delhi because “they were causing animal deaths, clogging sewers and harming the
environment”.

Significant interventions of the National Green Tribunal:

1.Case: M.C. Mehta Versus Union of India & Ors. (O.A. No. 200/2014)
Issue: Implementation of orders issued to remedy pollution of River Ganga
Date: 11.03.2019
Impact: The Tribunal while dealing with the execution of its 2015 orders on
cleaning of RIver Ganga looked into reports of the supervisory committee

7
appointed by the Tribunal on Segment A and B of Phase 1 of the river. Finding
incomplete action plans, the Tribunal warned that the National Mission for
Clean Ganga and the states of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand and West Bengal
will have to pay compensation for not responding and failing to formulate the
action plans for Phase II and III within a week.

2.Case: Central Pollution Control Board versus State of Andaman &

Nicobar & Ors. (O.A. No. 247/2017)
Issue: implementation of Plastic Waste Management Rules, 2016 (PWM Rules,
2016).
Date: 12.03.2019
Impact: Despite 22 states banning the use of plastic carry bags following
guidelines issued by CPCB in 2016, the regulator moved the Tribunal with a
grievance that there is lack of implementation. The Tribunal directed that as per
Rule 13 of the PWM Rules, 2016 states and union territories are required to
furnish a report to CPCB within one month and stated that failing to do so
would invite a fine of Rs 1 crore per month thereafter.

3. Case: Harinder Dhingra Versus International Recreation &

Amusement Ltd.& Ors (O.A. No. 458/2017)
Issue: Illegal drawl of ground water.
Date: 25.03.2019
Impact: The Tribunal dealing with the issue of illegal drawal of ground water at
Gurgaon particularly by Appu Ghan, an amusement park among others, directed
a committee with representatives of MoEF&CC, CPCB, Central Ground Water
Authority and District Magistrate, Gurgaon to review the existing policy of
permitting supply of water for commercial purposes, when there is scarcity of
drinking water and whether the water is being diverted from the river supply for
commercial use, without affecting e-flows.
The Tribunal approved the recommendations of the committee which suggested

8
measures including providing treated sewage water for amusement parks and
disconnecting canal water supply, increasing recharge of water. Significantly,
the Tribunal fixed timelines for the Haryana state government to implement
short term strategies within three months and long term strategies within nine
months.

Conclusion: There is need for more autonomy and widen NGT’s scope for effective
protection of environment in balance with human developmental activities.
Webliography: 1.indiacode.nic.in
2.academia.edu