Law and You > Environmental Laws > National Green Tribunal (NGT)

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) is a specialized judicial body established to handle environmental protection, conservation of forests, and natural resources. It also addresses disputes related to environmental matters with a focus on the enforcement of legal rights and providing relief for those affected by environmental damage. The NGT plays a crucial role in ensuring sustainable development by enforcing environmental laws.

Factors those Led in Formation of National Green Tribunal:

The main factors those led in the formation of NGT are:

• Recommendation of Supreme Court
• Oleum Gas Leak Case
• 186^th Law Commission Report Recommendations

In 1989, Maneka Gandhi, the then Union Minister of Environment, had advocated the idea of environment courts. However, it was only on 31 July 2009 that the National Green Tribunal Bill, 2009 was presented in the Lok Sabha. The Bill was referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science and Technology, Environment and Forests for examination and reports. After holding a series of meetings with the concerned officials, the Committee presented 203rd report on National Green Tribunal Bill on 16th November 2009. The Parliament passed the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 which came into effect on 18th October 2010.

National Green Tribunal:

Establishment of National Green Tribunal (S. 3):

The National Green Tribunal was established on October 18, 2010, under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. Justice Lokeshwar Singh Panta, former judge of the Supreme Court, took charge as the chairman of the National Green Tribunal. India became the third country in the world, after Australia and New Zealand, to have a dedicated green tribunal, and the first in developing nations. The NGT was set up to reduce the burden on traditional courts in handling environmental cases and to provide a faster and more effective remedy for environmental disputes. The creation of the tribunal was in response to India’s growing environmental challenges and the need for specialized expertise in handling complex environmental issues.

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.

Objectives of National Green Tribunal (NGT):

Some of the major objectives of the National Green Tribunal (NGT) are as follows:

• Effective and expeditious disposal of cases that are related to the protection and conservation of the environment, forests, and other natural resources.
• To give relief and compensation for any damages caused to persons and properties.
• To handle various environmental disputes that involve multi-disciplinary issues.

Composition of NGT (Ss. 4 to 7):

• 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.

Powers of NGT (S. 19):

• The Tribunal has jurisdiction over all civil cases involving substantial question relating to environment (including enforcement of any legal right relating to environment).
• 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).
• 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’. While passing any order/decision/ award, it shall apply the principles of sustainable development, the precautionary principle and the polluter pays principle.
• 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

Jurisdiction of NGT:

The NGT has original jurisdiction on all civil cases that involve a substantial question related to the environment and the enforcement of environmental laws. Any violation pertaining to these laws or any decision taken by the Government under these laws can be challenged before the NGT. Its jurisdiction covers:

• 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. The tribunal has the power to:

Key Principles Followed by NGT:

The NGT follows certain key environmental principles while adjudicating cases:

• Principle of Natural Justice: The principles of natural justice should be free of bias, and parties should be given a fair opportunity to be heard, and the court should inform the respective parties of all reasons and decisions made.
• Polluter Pays Principle: This principle holds that those responsible for pollution should bear the cost of managing it to prevent damage to human health or the environment.
• Precautionary Principle: This principle ensures that any activity posing a risk to the environment must be prevented, even if there is no scientific certainty about the potential harm.
• Sustainable Development: The tribunal ensures that development activities do not compromise the environment and the well-being of future generations.
• Intergenerational Equity: The principle that environmental conservation efforts must ensure that natural resources are available for future generations.

Procedure for Application and to File a Case:

The NGT follows a simplified process:

• Filing a Case: Any aggrieved party, including individuals, organizations, or the government, can file a case before the NGT regarding environmental disputes.
• Timeframe for Disposal: The tribunal is mandated to dispose of cases within six months of their filing, which provides a quicker resolution compared to the regular judicial system.
• Appeals: The NGT’s decisions can be appealed directly to the Supreme Court of India within 90 days of the order.

Eligibility for Filing Application before Tribunal [S. 18]:

The Act provides that without prejudice to the provisions contained in Section 16, an application for grant of relief or compensation or settlement of dispute may be made to the Tribunal by—

• the person, who has sustained the injury; or
• the owner of the property to which the damage has been caused; or
• where death has resulted from the environmental damage, by all or any of the legal representatives of the deceased; or
• any agent duly authorised 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
• any person aggrieved, including any representative body or organisation; or
• 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 being in force.

Procedure for Filing Application under the Act:

• The Tribunal follows a very simple procedure to file an application seeking compensation for environmental damage, or an appeal against an order or decision of the Government. The official language of the Tribunal is English.
• For every application/appeal where no claim for compensation is involved, a fee of INR 1000/- is to be paid. In case where compensation is being claimed, the fee will be one percent of the amount of compensation subject to a minimum of INR 1000/-
• Further the detailed specific procedure has been provided under National Green Tribunal (Practice and Procedure) Rules, 2011.

Remedy/Relief under the Act (Section 15):

Tribunal may in its order grant the following reliefs to the applicant:

• Relief/compensation to the victims of pollution and other environmental damage including accidents involving hazardous substances;
• Restitution of property damaged;
• Restitution of the environment for such areas as determined by the NGT.

However, no application for grant of any compensation or relief or restitution of property or environment shall be entertained unless it is made within a period of five years from the date on which the cause for such compensation or relief first arose.

Penalty for Non-Compliance (Section 26):

• Whosoever, fails to comply with any order or award or decision of the Tribunal under this act, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine which may extend to ten crore rupees or both. In case of continuation of contravention additional fine which may extend to twenty-five thousand rupees for every day during which such failure or contravention continues.
• However in case of non-compliance by company fine may be extended to twenty-five crore rupees, and in case the failure or contravention continues, with additional fine which may extend to one lakh rupees for every day during which such failure or contravention continues after conviction for the first such failure or contravention. For the purpose of punishment under this act the official responsible for the conducting the business the company shall be deemed to be guilty unless proved otherwise. (Section 27)
• Every offence under this Act shall be deemed to be non-cognizable within the meaning of the said Code

Challenges Faced by the NGT:

Despite its achievements, the NGT faces certain 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.
• Decisions of NGT have also been criticised and challenged due to their repercussions on economic growth and development.
• There exists no specific guideline or methodology to determine the amount of damages and fine to be imposed. 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.

• While the NGT can pass orders, the enforcement of its rulings often depends on state governments and other authorities, which sometimes results in non-compliance.
• Regardless of several proactive actions being taken by the tribunal the pollution levels have been continuously increasing over the years. This is due to lack of effective support from government both at the Centre as well in states.
• Some orders, especially those affecting major industrial or developmental projects, face resistance from political and economic actors.
• 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.
• Denial of access to justice has been the other major roadblock in the success of NGT. Access is denied due to the provision of limitation act mentioned in the Act.
• The tribunal has limited benches and resources, leading to delays in some cases. The justice delivery mechanism is also hindered by limited number of regional benches.
• Many people, especially in rural areas, are unaware of the NGT and its role, limiting its potential impact.
• There is a need to control the “frivolous” cases being filed before the tribunal. There has been an increase in frivolous and vested litigation as it is dealing with broader issue like environment protection which affects every individual and thus, locus standi is easily established.

Future of NGT:

Subramanian Committee has been set up by the Ministry to review the laws relating to the environment and forest protection. The Committee recommended establishment of special courts at district level to deal with infringements of environmental law and an administrative (rather than judicial) tribunal to review clearances. The chairman, T.S.R Subramanian, has stated that the NGT cannot pickup cases suo motu. These recommendations, if accepted, will cause serious reductions in the power of NGT.

Landmark Judgments:

The NGT has played a crucial role in addressing several significant environmental issues in India. Some landmark judgments include:

• Uttarakhand floods case (2013): The Alaknanda Hydro Power Co. Ltd. was ordered to compensate to the petitioner. Here, the NGT directly relied on the principle of ‘polluter pays’.
• POSCO Steel Plant Closure (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.
• Delhi Pollution and Vehicular Ban (Odd-Even Scheme): The NGT played a proactive role in enforcing air quality measures in Delhi, including supporting the government’s odd-even scheme for vehicles to control air pollution.
• Yamuna Pollution Case (2015): The NGT ordered the Delhi government to take steps to clean the Yamuna River and banned the dumping of waste along its banks. It also imposed fines for non-compliance.
• Art of Living Case (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 and directed restoration measures.
• Amarnath Cave Temple Case (2017): The NGT declared the Amarnath cave temple as a “silence zone” to protect the fragile ecosystem in the area and directed that no religious offerings or slogans should be made near the temple.
• The Plastic Ban Case: 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”.
• Sterlite Copper Plant Closure (2018): The NGT ordered the reopening of Vedanta’s Sterlite copper smelter plant in Tamil Nadu after it was shut down due to environmental violations. However, this decision was challenged and eventually reviewed in the courts.

In Almitra H. Patel v. Union of India, AIR 2000 SC 1256 case, where Mrs. Amrita Patel had filed a PIL under Article 32 of the Constitution in which the petitioner sought the urgent improvement in the practices followed for the treatment of solid waste or garbage in India. The tribunal considered it one of the major problems faced by India over the last few years as lakh tonnes of garbage go without proper treatment and just dumped outside the city in the outskirts. The tribunal noted the requirement to solve this problem and make it a source of power for the benefit of society. After hearing the case the tribunal issued over 25 directions. The tribunal asked all the states and UTs to strictly follow and implement the Solid Management Rules, 2016. A complete prohibition on open burning of waste on lands was made after the case.

In Save Mon Region Federation v. Union of India, 14 March, 2013 case, where an organization named Save Mon Region Federation filed an appeal along with a social activist for the clearance given to a hydro project. The project was close to a wintering site for a bird Black-necked Crane, which is included under Schedule I species under the Wildlife Protection Act of 1972. It also comes under the ‘Threatened Birds of India’ literature by the appellants in this case. It also had other endangered species such as the red panda, snow leopard, etc. The tribunal gave orders to suspend the clearance for the project. It also directed the EAC to make a new proposal for environmental clearance. The tribunal also directed the Ministry of Environment and Forest in the country to prepare a study on the protection of the bird involved in the case.

In Ms. Betty C. Alvares v. The State of Goa, 14 February, 2014 case, where a complaint was made regarding the illegal construction in Goa. It was being done by a person of foreign nationality. The maintainability of the case was challenged even before the decision came. There were two objections raised in this case, they were: The person has no locus standi in the matter as she was not from India and thus he cannot file the petition before the tribunal under Article 21 of the constitution because she has not been given any of these rights as a non-citizen and the matter was barred by the limitation law and should be dismissed. The case was initiated in Goa but was then transferred to the National Green Tribunal. The tribunal disagreed from the first objection in the case. The scope of Article 21 should not be narrowed. The court held that even if the complainant was not Indian then also the application was maintainable. A foreigner national can also approach the National Green Tribunal.

In M.P. Patil v. Union of India 13 March, 2014 case, environment clearance granted to the thermal project of NTPC was challenged by the local citizens on the ground that proper disclosures were not made in the Environment Impact Assessment and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Plan was not disclosed in advance. The Tribunal which explaining the importance of R&R Plan opined that “the concept of sustainable development is to drive a balance between environment on the one hand and development on the other. One of the essential facets of this balancing approach is to find out the impact of development upon civilization, particularly with reference to human beings. If as a result of establishment and operation of any project, a large chunk of land belonging to a large number of persons is expected to be acquired and they are likely to be displaced in one form or the other from their livelihood, R & R scheme would be one of the most pertinent aspects to be considered by the EAC”. “An appropriate R&R scheme was not available at the time of the public hearing. Also, the other objections raised at the public hearing were not properly answered during the public hearing.” Further, it was reiterated that the onus of proving that the proposed project was in compliance with goals of sustainable development was on the party proposing the project and public participation was emphasized by the court.

In Sudiep Shrivastava v. State of Chhattisgarh, 24 March, 2014 case, the Central government went against the recommendations of Forest Advisory Committee, (FAC) which rejected the proposal of diversion of forest, and granted approval to the project. The power of Central Government to reject the proposal/recommendations of the FAC and the validity of order were to be scrutinized by the Tribunal. The question was whether the Government is bound by the recommendations of FAC. The tribunal opined that ‘advice’ would not make it binding stricto sensu on the Central Government. However, the Central Government remains under an obligation to duly consider the advice of the FAC and pass a reasoned order either accepting with or without condition or rejecting the same based on facts, studies and such other authoritative material, if necessary gathered from further enquiry. The tribunal finally asked the Government to reconsider the entire matter afresh in accordance with law.

In Wilfred J. v. Ministry of Environment and Forests, 17 July, 2014 case, the NGT expressed its autonomy. It pointed out that “there is nothing in the provision of the NGT Act that directly or even by necessary implication is indicative of any external control over the National Green Tribunal. The Ministry of Environment and Forests is merely an administrative ministry for the National Green Tribunal to provide for means and finances. Once the budget is provided, the Ministry cannot have any interference in the functioning of the National Green Tribunal.” In fact, the entire process of appointment and removal is under the effective control of the Supreme Court of India. The administration is merely an executing agency within the framework of the Act.

In Srinagar Bandh Aapda Sangharsh Samiti v. Alaknanda hydro Power Co. Ltd., 19 Aug 2016 case, the principle of no-fault liability got invoked. In this judgement, the NGT relied on the ‘polluter pays’ principle and made a private entity liable to pay compensation. They were made the subjects to a code of environmental jurisprudence.

In Samit Mehta vs. Union of India, 13 November, 2017 case, where an environmentalist filed an application regarding the damage caused by the sinking of a ship which was carrying coal, fuel oil and diesel. Due to the sinking, a thick oil layer was formed on the surface of the sea which caused damage to the marine ecosystem. The tribunal was of the view that negligence could be attributed to some of the respondents and they had not adhered to the pre-voyage principles. In this case ‘Polluter Pays’ principle was invoked.

In Vardhaman Kaushik v. Union of India 22 March, 2024 case, the Tribunal took cognizance of the growing pollution levels in Delhi. It directed a Committee to prepare an action plan. In the interim, it directed that vehicles more than 15 years old not be allowed to ply or be parked on the roads; that burning plastics and other like materials be prohibited; that a web portal and a special task force be created; that sufficient space for two way conveyance be left on all market-roads in Delhi; that cycle tracks be constructed; that overloaded trucks and defunct buses not be allowed to ply; that air purifiers and automatic censors be installed in appropriate locations. Further, it directed that a fine of Rs. 1000 be levied on all cars parked on metaled roads and that multi-level parking be constructed in appropriate areas.

In Manoj Misra v. Union of India, 25 April, 2024 case, an application was filed before the tribunal against the debris and other solid waste dumped in the Yamuna river bed and effective measures for restoring the natural water body to its original form. Taking cognizance of the application the tribunal gave a set of twenty eight directions, ranging from prohibition on dumping debris to restricting silviculture and floriculture activities, preparation of Action Plan by concerned agencies, timely completion of project ‘Maily Se Nirmal Yamuna’, setting up of Common Effluent Treatment Plants and many others in the interest of protecting and restoring the River Yamuna.

Conclusion:

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has become a crucial pillar of environmental governance in India, playing a key role in the enforcement of environmental laws and promoting the principles of sustainable development. Since its establishment in 2010, the NGT has expedited the resolution of environmental disputes, provided a platform for addressing environmental grievances, and ensured that polluters are held accountable. Through its adherence to principles like sustainable development, the polluter pays principle, and the precautionary principle, the NGT has significantly contributed to balancing economic growth with environmental conservation. Its landmark judgments on pollution control, forest conservation, and environmental restoration have set important precedents in Indian environmental law.

However, the NGT faces challenges such as limited resources, infrastructure constraints, and implementation issues, which sometimes hinder its effectiveness. Despite these hurdles, the NGT remains a vital institution in India’s legal landscape, ensuring that environmental protection is prioritized and that justice is accessible to those affected by environmental degradation.

In conclusion, the NGT plays an indispensable role in fostering environmental accountability, promoting sustainable development, and protecting natural resources for future generations in India. With ongoing support and improvements, it can continue to be a strong force for environmental justice in the country.

For More Articles on Environmental Laws Click Here

For More Articles on Different Acts, Click Here