DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW

UNIVERSITY

VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P., INDIA

ENVIRONMENTAL LAW

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL

NAME OF THE FACULTY

DR. K SUDHA

G. ARTHI

19LLB102 & Semester V

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………...2

Abstract…………………………………………………………………………….3

Introduction………………………………………………………………………..4

Establishment and Composition of the Tribunal…………………………………6

Jurisdiction and Powers……………………………………………………………7

Judicial Remedy……………………………………………………………………9

Instances…………………………………………………………………………..11

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………….13

Bibliography………………………………………………………………………14

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I w0uld like t0 express my gratitude and heartfelt appreciati0n t0 my teachers wh0 gave me the
g0lden 0pp0rtunity t0 d0 this w0nderful pr0ject 0n this interesting t0pic; which helped me learn,
analyze and expl0re this specific field 0f subject by digging deeper int0 the never ending mine 0f
kn0wledge thr0ugh an extensive and th0r0ugh research.

2
 ABSTRACT

It is a specialised b0dy established under the Nati0nal Green Tribunal Act (2010) f 0r the
effective and timely res0luti0n 0f matters inv0lving envir0nmental pr0tecti0n and f0rest and
0ther natural res0urce c0nservati0n. India became the third c0untry in the w0rld, after Australia
and New Zealand, t0 establish a specialised envir0nmental tribunal, and the first devel0ping
c0untry t0 d0 s0 with the f0unding 0f the NGT. The NGT is required t 0 issue a final decisi0n
0n petiti0ns 0r appeals within six m0nths 0f their submissi0n. The NGT has five sitting
l0cati0ns: New Delhi is the principal l0cati0n, f0ll0wed by Bh0pal, Pune, K0lkata, and
Chennai.

The Chairpers0n, Judicial Members, and Expert Members make up the Tribunal. They are
app0inted f0r a five-year term and are n0t eligible f0r re-app0intment. The Central
G0vernment, in c0llab0rati0n with the Chief Justice 0f India, app0ints the Chairpers0n (CJI).

The nati0nal g0vernment will app0int a Selecti0n C0mmittee t0 app0int the Judicial and Expert
Members. The tribunal must have at least 10 and n0 m0re than 20 full-time judicial and expert
members. The Tribunal has jurisdicti 0n 0ver all civil pr0ceedings inv0lving significant
envir0nmental issues (including enf0rcement 0f any legal right relating t0 envir0nment). Apart
fr0m 0riginal jurisdicti0n 0n the filing 0f an applicati0n, as a statut0ry adjudicat0ry b0dy, the
NGT als0 p0ssesses appellate jurisdicti0n t0 hear appeals as a C0urt (Tribunal).

The Tribunal is n0t limited by the meth 0d 0utlined in the C0de 0f Civil Pr0cedure 0f 1908, but
will be g0verned by natural justice principles. It must ad0pt the principles 0f sustainable
devel0pment, precauti0nary principle, and p0lluter pays principle when giving any
0rder/decisi0n/award.

3
 INTRODUCTION

There was a need t0 strengthen an Envir0nmental Justice apparatus in the aftermath 0f different
envir0nmental disasters and cases. The Bh0pal gas accident in 1984 pr0mpted the Supreme
C0urt t0 underline the necessity f0r envir0nmental tribunals t0 be established. In Charan Lal
Sahu v. Union of India1 the c0urt 0pined that “under the existing civil law damages are
determined by the civil Courts, after a long drawn litigation, which destroys the very purpose of
awarding damages so in order to meet the situation, to avoid delay and to ensure immediate
relief to the victims, the law should provide for constitution of tribunals regulated by special
procedure for determining compensation to victims of industrial disaster or accident, appeal
against which may lie to this Court on the limited ground of questions of law only after
depositing the amount determined by the Tribunal”. The Supreme C0urt 0f India at vari0us
instances als0 has 0pined that as envir0nment cases inv0lve assessment 0f scientific data it
w0uld be desirable t0 have the setting up 0f “environmental courts on a regional basis with a
professional judge and two experts keeping in view the expertise required for such
adjudication.”2

Again in the judgment 0f Indian Council for Enviro- Legal Action v. Union of India 3 , the
Supreme C0urt 0bserved that Envir0nmental C0urts having civil and criminal jurisdicti 0n must
be established t0 deal with the envir0nmental issues in a speedy manner. The Nati 0nal
Envir0nment Tribunal Act, 1995, and the Nati 0nal Envir0nment Appellate Auth0rity Act, 1997,
were created by the Indian Parliament t0 adjudicate 0n claims f0r c0mpensati0n f0r victims 0f
envir0nmental disasters. The Nati0nal Envir0nment Tribunal was never established, and the
Nati0nal Envir0nment Appellate Auth0rity (hereafter referred t0 as NEAA) was 0nly 0perati0nal
f0r three years. The NEAA had a very limited sc 0pe and acted as an appeals b0dy f0r the
Ministry 0f Envir0nment and F0rest's decisi0n t0 award a pr0ject envir0nmental clearance.

1
AIR 1990 SC 1480
2
M.C. Mehta v. Uni0n 0f India, AIR 1987 SC 965-967; Indian C0uncil f0r Envir0 Legal Acti0n v. Uni0n 0f India,
1996 (3) SCC 212; AP P 0lluti0n C0ntr0l B0ard v. M V Nayudu, 1999 (2) SCC 718; A P P 0lluti0n C0ntr0l B0ard v.
M V Nayudu II, 2001 (2) SCC 62
3
(1996) 3 SCC 212

4
These tw0 tribunals were n0nfuncti0nal and existed 0nly 0n paper. This issue was als0
c0nsidered by the Law C0mmissi0n 0f India and dealt at length in its 186th Rep 0rt4. Law
C0mmissi0n was guided by the m0del 0f envir0nmental c0urt established in New Zealand and
the Land and Envir0nmental C0urt 0f New S0uth Wales and als0 the 0bservati0ns 0f the
Supreme C0urt in f0ur judgments, namely, M.C. Mehta v. Union of India5, Indian Council for
EnvironmentalLegal Action v. Union of India6 ; A.P. Pollution Control Board v. M.V.
Nayudu7 and A.P. Pollution Control Board v. M.V. Nayudu II 8 . T0 give effect t0 these
exh0rtati0ns c0ntained in the gl0bal declarati0ns 0n envir0nment and t0 pr0vide f0r a specialized
f0rum f0r effective and expediti0us disp0sal 0f cases arising 0ut 0f enf0rcement 0f
envir0nmental laws in the c0untry, the Indian Parliament has enacted, the Nati 0nal Green
Tribunal Act, 2010 which has c0me int0 f0rce 0n 2 June 2010.

4
Law C0mmissi0n 0f India, 186th Rep0rt, Pr0p0sal t0 C0nstitute Envir0nment C0urts, September 2003
5
AIR 1987 SC 965
6
(1996) 3 SCC 212
7
[1999] 2 SCC 718
8
[2001] 2 SCC 62

5
 ESTABLISHMENT AND COMPOSITION OF THE TRIBUNAL

The Act all0ws the Central G0vernment t0 create the Green Tribunal, which will exercise the
jurisdicti0n, p0wers, and auth0rity best0wed 0n it by 0r under this Act, by n0tificati0n having
effect fr0m the date stated therein. The Central G 0vernment has the auth0rity t0 determine the
regular place 0r sites 0f sitting 0f the sessi0n by n0tificati0n. The NGT is made up 0f a
chairpers0n, judicial 0fficers, and envir0nmental experts wh0 will hear cases inv0lving
envir0nmental pr0tecti0n and rights vi0lati0ns all ar0und the c0untry and have the auth0rity t0
decide and distribute c0mpensati0n.

The Tribunal shall be c0mp0sed 0f at least ten but n0 m0re than twenty full-time expert
members, as determined by the Central G0vernment fr0m time t0 time. The chairpers0n has been
given permissi0n t0 app0int 0ne 0r m0re expert members t0 assist the c0urt in a specific case
bef0re the Tribunal. A pers0n cann0t be app0inted as the Chairpers0n 0r a judicial member 0f
the Tribunal unless he is 0r has been a judge 0f the Supreme C0urt 0f India 0r a Chief Justice 0f
a High C0urt, acc0rding t0 the Act. A pers0n wh0 is 0r was a judge 0f the High C0urt, 0n the
0ther hand, can be app0inted as a judicial member.

The Central G0vernment, in c0njuncti0n with the Chief Justice 0f India, may select the
Chairpers0n 0f the Tribunal, acc0rding t0 the Act. The Central G0vernment will app0int the
remaining members based 0n the rec0mmendati0ns 0f the Selecti0n C0mmittee. The NGT
w0uld first be established in five cities: Delhi, Bh0pal, Pune, K0lkata, and Chennai. The
instituti0nal structure has been criticized f0r being structured in such a way that the
qualificati0ns f0r a technical member fav0r bureaucrats. Higher degrees in science, techn0l0gy,
and administrative experience are c0nsidered in the legislati 0n, but n0 pr0visi0n is made f0r
ec0l0gist, s0ci0l0gist, envir0nmentalist, 0r civil s0ciety activist.

6
 JURISDICTION AND POWERS

The NGT shall hear the disputes arising fr0m the enf0rcement 0f any legal right relating t0
envir0nment and shall als0 include vi0lati0n 0f specific statut0ry envir0nmental 0bligati0ns by
an individual firm, c0mpany, l0cal auth0rity etc. The jurisdicti0n t0 hear a case inv0lving
envir0nmental matters is wider than the 0ne c0nferred 0n the Nati0nal Envir0nmental Appellate
Auth0rity which has n0w been replacing by the new Act. The Act c0nfers 0n the Green Tribunal
t0 hear initial c0mplaints as well as appeals fr0m decisi0ns 0f auth0rities under vari0us
envir0nmental laws. The NGT will als0 functi0n as appellate auth0rity t0 pers0ns aggrieved by
any 0rder 0r decisi0n made under the f0ll0wing Acts:

 Water (Preventi0n and C0ntr0l 0f P0lluti0n) Act, 1974

 Water (Preventi0n and C0ntr0l 0f P0lluti0n) Cess Act, 1977
 F0rest (C0nservati0n) Act 1980 d. Air (Preventi0n and C0ntr0l 0f P0lluti0n) Act, 1981
 Envir0nment (Pr0tecti0n) Act, 1986
 f. Bi0l0gical Diversity Act 2002.

Secti0n 34 0f the C0nstituti0n gives the Central G0vernment the auth0rity t0 change the
C0nstituti0n by issuing a n0tificati0n that adds 0r deletes an act. The Act d0es n0t pr0vide the
Tribunal auth0rity 0ver all envir0nmental laws, such as the Wildlife Pr0tecti0n Act 0f 1972, the
Indian F0rest Act 0f 1927, the Scheduled Tribes (Rec0gniti0n 0f F0rest Rights Act) 0f 2005, and
0ther state laws. The Tribunal has been chastised f0r n0t having any Su0 m0tt0 p0wer t0
c0mmence pr0ceedings against any0ne, even if the t0pic is 0f nati0nal imp0rtance.

The Tribunal w0uld be guided by the principles 0f natural justice and sustainable devel0pment
rather than the pr0cedure pr0vided 0ut in the C0de 0f Civil Pr0cedure, 1908. Under the Civil
Pr0cedure C0de 0f 1973, h0wever, the Tribunal will have all 0f the p0wers 0f a civil c0urt. It is
als0 w0rth n0ting that the civil c0urt will n0t c0nsider cases that the Tribunal is c 0mpetent t0
hear. It is a tribunal, and thus a quasi-judicial c0urt (th0ugh it is believed t0 be judicial
pr0cesses), with the p0wer t0 make decisi0ns based 0n evidence. It is likewise unaffected by the
1872 Indian Evidence Act.

7
The principle 0f precauti0nary principle and the p0lluter pays principle is als0 t0 be applied
while passing a judgment in the NGT. Als0, the decisi0n 0f the NGT is binding 0n the parties.
Further n0 injuncti0n in respect 0f any acti0n taken 0r t0 be taken by 0r bef0re the Tribunal shall
be granted by civil c0urt.

The c0mplaint must be res0lved within six m0nths after being submitted with the tribunal.
Furtherm0re, it can 0nly deal with civil cases, with criminal 0ffences being excluded. The NGT
has the auth0rity t0 c0mpensate victims 0f envir0nmental deteri0rati0n 0r harm, and the am0unt
0f c0mpensati0n that can be awarded is unlimited. The tribunal's award 0f c0mpensati0n 0r relief
will be credited t0 the Envir0nmental Relief Fund 2008, which was established under the Public
Liability Insurance Act 1991. A pers0n wh0 fails t0 c0mply with the tribunal's 0rder is subject t0
impris0nment f0r up t0 three years 0r a fine 0f up t0 Rs. ten cr0res. If the pers0n in questi0n is a
firm, the penalty might be as much as Rs. 25 cr 0res. If a pers0n believes he has been wr0nged by
any 0f the NGT's decisi0ns, he can take his case t0 the Supreme C0urt.9

9
Secti0n 22, Nati0nal Green Tribunal Act, 2010; Act: Nati0nal Envir0nment Appellate Auth0rity act, 1997; Act:
Envir0nment (Pr0tecti0n) Act, 1986.

8
 JUDICIAL REMEDY

The Act envisages vari0us reliefs. It says that the Tribunal may, by an 0rder, pr0vide relief and
c0mpensati0n t0 the victims 0f p0lluti0n and 0ther envir0nmental damage arising under the
enactments specified in the Schedule-I t0 the Act, including accident 0ccurring while handling
any hazard0us substance. It may als0 0rder the restituti0n 0f the pr0perty damaged and the
restituti0n 0f the envir0nment f0r that areas as the Tribunal may think fit.

The relief under this Act is an additi 0n t0 the relief given under the Public Liability Insurance
Act, 1991.The Act seeks t0 disc0urage delayed applicati0ns f0r relief. If stipulates that n0
applicati0n f0r the ab0ve menti0ned categ0ries 0f relief w0uld be entertained by the Tribunal
unless it is made within a peri0d 0f five years fr0m the date 0n which the cause f0r such relief
first ar0se. H0wever, the Tribunal may all0w further sixty days f0r the applicati0n t0 be filed if it
is satisfied that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause fr0m filing such applicati0n.

The Act 0bligates the claimants under the Act t0 intimate t0 the Tribunal ab0ut the applicati0n
filed t0, 0r as the case may be, c0mpensati0n 0r relief received fr0m, any 0ther c0urt 0r
auth0rity. The Act pr0vides f0r an expediti0us relief and 0bligates the Tribunal t0 endeav0r t0
disp0se 0f the applicati0n 0r, the case may be, an appeal finally within six m 0nths fr0m the date
0f filing the applicati0n, 0r, as the case may be, the appeal, after pr 0viding the parties an
0pp0rtunity t0 be heard.10

The Act pr0vides that an applicati0n f0r grant 0f relief 0r c0mpensati0n 0r settlement 0f dispute
may be made t0 the Tribunal by —

“(a) any person who has sustained the injury; or (b) the owner of the property to which the
damage has been caused or (c) all or any of the legal representatives of the deceased where
death has resulted from the environmental damage or (d) any agent duly authorized by such
person or owner of such property or all or any of the legal representatives of the deceased, as
the case may be; or (e) any person aggrieved; including any representative body or
organization.

10
Secti0n 18(3), Nati0nal Green Tribunal, 2010

9
In addition, the Central Government or a State Government, or a Union Territory
administration or the Central Pollution Control Board or a State Pollution Control Board or a
Pollution Control Committee or a local Authority or any environmental authority constituted or
established under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 or any other law for the time in force,
can also move the Tribunal.”11

11
Secti0n 18(2)

10
 INSTANCES

This Act best0ws ample p0wer 0n the Green Tribunal if its 0rders are n0t c0mplied with; t0
imp0se penalty which may be either three years pris 0n 0r up t0 ten cr0res and f0r c0mpanies it
may extend up t0 twenty five cr0res.12 The act ad0pts a t0ugh p0sture against c0mpanies13. If it is
pr0ved that the 0ffence has been c0mmitted with the c0nsent 0r c0nnivance 0f, 0r is attributable
t0 any neglect 0n the part 0f any direct0r, manager, secretary 0r 0ther 0fficer 0f the c0mpany,
such direct0r, manager, secretary 0r 0ther 0fficers shall als0 be deemed t0 be guilty 0f that
0ffence and shall be liable t0 be pr0ceeded against and punished acc0rdingly.

This is a c0mmendable inclusi0n in the bill and at least it will instill sense 0f fear am0ng higher
0fficials 0f c0mpany t0 pay due attenti0n t0 envir0nmental perf0rmance 0f their c0mpany. But
the accused can take defense that he did n 0t have the kn0wledge 0r he has taken all the due care
t0 prevent the c0mmissi0n 0f the 0ffence14. Hence, this str0ng inclusi0n is diluted.

The Nati0nal Green Tribunal (NGT) recently criticized the tw0-stage f0rest clearance granted by
the Uni0n Ministry 0f Envir0nment and F0rests (M0EF) t0 the pr0p0sed steel plant 0f S0uth
K0rean steel giant, POSCO, in Odisha. The present NGT Chairpers 0n Justice Swatanter Kumar
0bserved that “The F0rest (C0nservati0n) Act d0es n0t have any pr0visi0n 0n tw0-stagef0rest
clearance. It will have a far-reaching effect.”

The initial envir0nment clearance t0 the plant was granted in 2007 by M 0EF. F0ll0wing
allegati0ns that the ministry had n0t adhered t0 F0rest Rights Act, M0EF set up the N.C. Saxena
c0mmittee in July 2010 t0 review the clearance. Despite the c 0mmittee’s rep0rt indicating that
pr0visi0ns 0f the F0rest Rights Act had been vi0lated, M0EF issued final 0rder 0n January 31,
2011 and gave envir0nment clearance t0 POSCO.

The present appeal against M0EF’s clearance t0 the steel pr0ject was filed bef0re the Nati0nal
Green Tribunal (NGT) Act 0f 2010 and challenges the final 0rder 0f the M0EF, which imp0ses

12
Secti0n 26(1)
13
Secti0n 27
14
Pr0vis0 t0 Secti0n 27

11
additi0nal c0nditi0ns t0 the 0riginal envir0nmental clearance granted in respect 0f steel-cum-
captive p0wer plant pr0ject

On sand mining

Reaffirming February 27, 2012, Supreme C0urt’s 0rder banning any kind 0f mining 0f min0r
minerals, including sand, with0ut envir0nmental clearance fr0m the Uni0n Ministry 0f
Envir0nment and F0rests, the NGT 0n 5 August 2013 issued a restraint 0rder against all sand
mining activity being carried 0ut acr0ss the c0untry with0ut envir0nmental clearance. The bench
c0mprising justices Swatenter Kumar, U D Salvi, S N Hussain, and experts, D K Agarwal and
Ranjan Chatterjee said that rem0val 0f minerals fr0m river beds is p0sing a seri0us threat t0 the
fl0w 0f rivers, survival 0f f0rests up0n river banks and m0st seri0usly t0 the envir0nment 0f
river banks, especially th0se 0f the Yamuna, Ganga, Chambal, Gaumti and Revati rivers. The
NGT bench als0 0bserved that “majority of persons carrying out mining activity of removing
mineral from the river bed have no license to extract sand; they also have not obtained
clearance from Ministry of Environment and Forests or the State Environment Impact
Assessment Authority (SEIAA) at any stage in terms of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
(EP Act, 1986) as well as Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and Water
(Prevention and Control of Pollution) act, 197415”

While the bench initially restrained illegal sand mining 0n the beds and banks 0f rivers Yamuna,
Ganga, Hind0n, Chambal, G0mti, am0ngst 0thers, but later m0dified its 0rder saying the issue 0f
illegally rem0ving sand has nati0nwide implicati0ns.16 On August 14, 2013, The Nati0nal Green
Tribunal (NGT) decided t0 set up an expert c0mmittee 0n illegal sand mining t0 carry 0ut any
0rders that it may pass in future and t0 prepare a c0mprehensive rep0rt 0n the issue. The
c0mmittee will als0 carry 0ut a c0mprehensive z0ning and mapping t0 delineate areas where
mining c0uld be permitted and t0 what extent. The tribunal specifically banned beach sand
mining in the c0astal States citing specific instances 0f State 0f Tamil Nadu - where 2,30,000
t0nnes beach sand mineral has been quarried in Vaippar village with0ut permissi0n 0f any
G0vernment Auth0rity and State 0f Kerala.

15
"N0 sand mining with0ut envir0nment clearance: NGT". D0wn t0 Earth. Aug 5, 2013. Retrieved 05 August, 2013.
16
"NGT Restrains Sand Mining Acr0ss The C0untry".Tehelka. Aug 5, 2013. Retrieved 05 August , 2013.

12
 CONCLUSION

The Act is c0nsidered a critical step in capacity devel0pment because the Act strengthens the
framew0rk 0f gl0bal envir0nmental g0vernance. The judiciary has been the backb 0ne f0r
devel0ping a large b0dy 0f envir0nmental jurisprudence, even th0ugh p0licy enf0rcement has
been weak. A Nati0nal Envir0nment Pr0tecti0n Auth0rity is als0 t0 be established sh0rtly t0
m0nit0r the implementati0n 0f envir0nment laws. C0ming t0 dark side 0f the Act, the rules
relating t0 c0nstituti0n and c0mp0siti0n 0f selecti0n c0mmittee tilts the balance 0f p0wer in
fav0r 0f Central G0vernment. Keeping in view the repeal 0f the Nati0nal Envir0nment Tribunal
Act, 1995 and the Nati0nal Envir0nment Appellate Auth0rity Act, 1997 by the present Act17, it is
submitted that legislati0n sh0uld bec0me 0perati0nal in letter and spirit t0 pr0vide much needed
relief against 0ffences/c0mplaints f0r degradati0n 0f envir0nment.

It is further suggested that in 0rder t0 achieve m0re fruitful result the envir0nment c0urt sh0uld
be established in each state h0wever, in case 0f smaller States and Uni0n Territ0ries, 0ne c0urt
f0r m0re than 0ne State 0r Uni0n Territ0ry may serve the purp0se. It is n0t unc0mm0n f0r a
statute t0 take a few years bef0re it gr0ws int0 a str0ng and extensive statute. It is 0nly thr0ugh
interpretati0ns and implementati0n 0ver the years that the strength and sh 0rtc0mings bec0me
clear. The Nati0nal Green Tribunal Act, 2010 is in a nascent stage n0w and it is 0nly with time
that its practicality and efficiency will be exp0sed.

17
Sec 38(1), Nati0nal Green Tribunal Act, 2010

13
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Nati0nal Green Tribunal Act, 2010

JSTOR

Manupatra

HeinOnline

14