KINGSTON LAW COLLEGE

(A UNIT OF KINGSTON EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE)

GREEN BENCH TRIBUNAL REPORT

ACADEMIC YEAR (2022-2025)
UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF DR. SHAMSHER ALI (HOD), KINGSTON
LAW COLLEGE

SUBMITTED BY
NAME: RAJA DAS
UNIVERSITY ROLL NO: 30322011250085
REGISTRATION NO: 3032211406398, SESSION: 2022
COLLEGE ROLL NO: 22/KLC-LL.B/203
COURSE: LL. B (3 YEARS), 6TH SEMESTER
SESSION: 2022-2025

1|Page
 KINGSTON LAW COLLEGE
(A UNIT OF KINGSTON EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE)

GREEN BENCH TRIBUNAL REPORT

ACADEMIC YEAR (2022-2025)
UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF DR. SHAMSHER ALI (HOD), KINGSTON
LAW COLLEGE

SUBMITTED BY
NAME: RAJA DAS
UNIVERSITY ROLL NO: 30322011250085
REGISTRATION NO: 3032211406398, SESSION: 2022
COLLEGE ROLL NO: 22/KLC-LL.B/203
COURSE: LL. B (3 YEARS), 6TH SEMESTER
SESSION: 2022-2025

___________________________________________________________
SIGNATURE OF THE GUIDE - DR. SHAMSHER ALI (HOD)

2|Page
 INDEX

SL. PARTICULARS PAGE NO.

NO.
1. DECLARATTION 4
2. CERTIFICATE 5
3. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 6
4. ABBREVIATION 7
5. INTRODUCTION 8
6. ABOUT GREEN TRIBUNAL 9
7. CASE LAWS 22 – 45
8. CONCLUSION 46

3|Page
 DECLARATTION

I, RAJA DAS, A STUDENT OF LL.B (3 YEARS), KINGSTON LAW

COLLEGE, BEARING COLLEGE ROLL NO- 22/KLC-LL.B/203,
HEREBY DECLARE THAT THIS ASSIGNMENT IS MY OWN, IT HAS
NOT BEEN PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED FOR EXAMINATION IN
FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT OF THE DEGREE OF LAW
FROM THIS OR ANY OTHER UNIVERSITY BEFORE.

SUBMITTED BY

NAME: RAJA DAS

UNIVERSITY ROLL NO: 30322011250085
REGISTRATION NO: 3032211406398, SESSION: 2022
COLLEGE ROLL NO: 22/KLC-LL.B/203
COURSE: LL. B (3 YEARS), 6TH SEMESTER
SESSION: 2022-2025

____________________________________________
SIGNATURE OF THE STUDENT – RAJA DAS

4|Page
 CERTIFICATE

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT RAJA DAS, STUDENT OF KINGSTON

LAW COLLEGE, LL.B (3 YEARS) BEARING COLLEGE ROLL NO:
22/KLC-LL.B/203, REGISTRATION NO: 3032211406398,
SESSION: 2022-2025, UNIVERSITY ROLL NO:
30322011250085, UNDER WEST BENGAL STATE UNIVERSITY
HAS DONE THIS PROJECT WORK UNDER GUIDANCE OF DR.
SHAMSHER ALI, HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT (HOD)
TOWARDS THE FULFILMENT OF LL.B DEGREE DURING THE
PERIOD OF 2022-2025.

PLACE: KOLKATA
DATE:

_______________________
SUPERVISOR
DR. SHAMSHER ALI,
HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT (HOD)
(KINGSTON LAW COLLEGE)

5|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I, RAJA DAS, A STUDENT OF LL.B (3 YEARS), KINGSTON LAW

COLLEGE, BEARING COLLEGE ROLL NO: 22/KLC-LL.B/203,
HAS PREPARED THIS GREEN BENCH TRIBUNAL REPORT. THE
FINAL OUTCOME OF THIS ASSIGNMENT REQUIRED EXTENSIVE
GUIDANCE AND ASSISTANCE WHICH I GOT FROM MY HEAD OF
THE DEPARTMENT DR. SAMSHER ALI AND OUR PRINCIPAL SIR
DR. SUMAN GUPTA SHARMA AND FROM OTHER FACULTY
MEMBERS AND I AM EXTREMELY FORTUNATE TO HAVE GOT
THIS ALL ALONG WITH THE COMPLETION OF MY PROJECT
WORK. I RESPECT AND THANK ALL MY TEACHERS FOR GIVING
ME AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THIS PROJECT WORK AND ALSO
BY PROVIDING ALL THE SUPPORT THAT WAS REQUIRED TO
ACCOMPLISH THIS PROJECT.

ALSO, I WOULD LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THIS PROJECT

WAS COMPLETED ENTIRELY BY ME AND NOT BY SOMEONE
ELSE.

SINCERELY,

NAME: RAJA DAS

UNIVERSITY ROLL NO: 30322011250085
REGISTRATION NO: 3032211406398, SESSION: 2022
COLLEGE ROLL NO: 22/KLC-LL.B/203
COURSE: LL. B (3 YEARS), 6TH SEMESTER
SESSION: 2022-2025
____________________________________________
SIGNATURE OF THE STUDENT – RAJA DAS

6|Page
 ABBREVIATION

ABBREVIATION FULL FORM

CJI CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA

CRL CRIMINAL
CVL CIVIL
NGT NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL

UOI UNION OF INDIA

J JUSTICE
APP. APPLICANT

7|Page
 INTRODUCTION
In the aftermath of various environmental disasters and cases,
there was a need to step up a mechanism for Environmental
Justice. The Bhopal gas disaster in 1984, had led the Supreme
Court to emphasize on the need for constitution of environmental
courts. In Charan Lal Sahu v. Union of India. the court opined 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 Court of India
at various instances also has opined that as environment cases
involve assessment of scientific data it would be desirable to have
the setting up of “environmental courts on a regional basis with a
professional judge and two experts keeping in view the expertise
required for such adjudication. Again in the judgment of Indian
Council for Enviro- Legal Action v. Union of India, the Supreme
Court observed that Environmental Courts having civil and
criminal jurisdiction must be established to deal with the
environmental issues in a speedy manner.

The Parliament of India enacted two specific laws- the National

Environment Tribunal Act, 1995 for adjudicating on claims and
compensation for victims of environmental disasters and the
National Environment Appellate Authority Act, 1997. The National

8|Page
Environment Tribunal never came into functioning while the
National Environment Appellate Authority (herein referred as
NEAA) functioned with full composition only for 3 years4. The
NEAA had a very limited mandate and served as an appellate body
against the decision of the Ministry of Environment and Forest
granting environment clearance to a project. These two tribunals
were non functional and existed only on paper. This issue was also
considered by the Law Commission of India and dealt at length in
its 186th Report. Law Commission was guided by the model of
environmental court established in New Zealand and the Land and
Environmental Court of New South Wales and also the
observations of the Supreme Court in four judgments to give effect
to these exhortations contained in the global declarations on
environment and to provide for a specialized forum for effective and
expeditious disposal of cases arising out of enforcement of
environmental laws in the country, the Indian Parliament has
enacted, the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 which has come
into force on 2 June 2010.

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL

9|Page
 WHAT IS NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
In simple words it is an act to provide for the establishment of a
National Green Tribunal for the effective and expeditious disposal
of cases relating to environmental protection and conservation of
forests and other natural resources including enforcement of any
legal right relating to environment and giving relief and
compensation for damages to persons and property and for matters
connected therewith or incidental thereto.
The Tribunal's dedicated jurisdiction in environmental matters
shall provide speedy environmental justice and help reduce the
burden of litigation in the higher courts. The tribunal shall not be
bound by the procedure laid down under the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908, but shall be guided by principles of natural
justice. The tribunal is mandated to make and endeavour for
disposal of applications or appeals finally within 6 months of filing
of the same. Initially, the NGT is proposed to be set up at five places
of sittings and will follow circuit procedure for making itself more
accessible; New Delhi is the Principal Place of Sitting of the
Tribunal and Bhopal, Pune, Kolkata and Chennai shall be the other
place of sitting of the Tribunal.
 It 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

10 | P a g e
 WHAT MADE THIS BODY A REALITY

During the summit of United Nations Conference on Environment and

Development in June 1992, India vowed the participating states to

provide judicial and administrative remedies to the victims of the

pollutants and other environmental damage.

There lie many reasons behind the setting up of this tribunal. After
India's move with Carbon credits, such tribunal may play a vital
role in ensuring the control of emissions and maintaining the
desired levels. This is the first body of its kind that is required by
its parent statute to apply the "polluter pays" principle and the
principle of sustainable development.

This court can rightly be called ‘special’ because India is the third
country following Australia and New Zealand to have such a
system. Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC) works under
the act of (NGT).

11 | P a g e
 STRUCTURE

The Principal Bench of the NGT is in New Delhi. It has regional

benches in Pune (West), Bhopal (Central), Chennai (South) and
Kolkata (East). Each Bench has a specified geographical
jurisdiction in a region. Further, mechanism for circuit benches
are also available. For example, the Southern Zone bench, which
is based in Chennai, can decide to have sittings in other places like
Bangalore or Hyderabad.

The Chairperson of the NGT is a retired Judge of the Supreme

Court, head quartered in New Delhi. On 18 October 2010,
Justice Lokeshwar Singh Panta became its first Chairman. Retired
justice Adarsh Kumar Goel is the incumbent chairman. Other
Judicial members are retired Judges of High Courts. Each bench
of the NGT will comprise at least one Judicial Member and one
Expert Member. Expert members should have a professional
qualification and a minimum of 15 years experience in the field of
environment/forest conservation and related subjects.

CONCLUSION FOR STRUCTURE

 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.

12 | P a g e
 ESTABLISHMENT AND COMPOSITION OF
NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
The Act empowers the Central Government to establish, by
notification with effect from such date as may be specified therein,
the Green Tribunal to exercise jurisdiction, powers and authority
that may be conferred on such Tribunal by or under this Act. The
Central Government is empowered to specify, by notification, the
ordinary place or places of sitting of the sitting. The NGT comprises
a chairperson, judicial officers and environmental expert members
which will hear the cases regarding infringement of environmental
protection and rights around in the country and have the powers to
decide and disperse compensations. The Tribunal shall consist of not
less than ten but subject to maximum of twenty full- time expert
members as the Central Government may notify from time to time.
The Act stipulates that 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. However, a person who is or has been
a judge of a High Court can be appointed as a judicial member. The
Act states that the Chairperson of the Tribunal may be appointed by
the Central Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of
India. The other members shall be appointed by the Central
Government on the recommendation of such Selection Committee as
may be prescribed. Initially, the NGT is proposed to be set up in five
places- Delhi, Bhopal, Pune, Kolkata and Chennai. The act considers
higher degrees in Science, Technology and Administrative experience
but no provision for ecologist, sociologist, environmentalist, civil
society or NGO etc.

13 | P a g e
 POWERS & JURISDICTION
The NGT shall hear the disputes arising from the enforcement of
any legal right relating to environment and shall also include
violation of specific statutory environmental obligations by an
individual firm, company, local authority etc. The jurisdiction to
hear a case involving environmental matters is wider than the one
conferred on the National Environmental Appellate Authority
which has now been replacing by the new Act. The Act confers on
the Green Tribunal to hear initial complaints as well as appeals
from decisions of authorities under various environmental laws.
The NGT will also function as appellate authority to persons
aggrieved by any order or decision made under the following Acts:

1. Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974

2. Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977
3. Forest (Conservation) Act 1980
4. Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981
5. Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and
6. Biological Diversity Act 2002
 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'.

14 | P a g e
 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
o relief and compensation to the victims of pollution and
other environmental damage (including accident occurring
while handling any hazardous substance),
o for restitution of property damaged, and
o 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:
o Imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years,
o Fine which may extend to ten crore rupees, and
o 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.
 Any violation pertaining to these laws or any decision taken by
the Government under these laws can be challenged before the
NGT.

15 | P a g e
 JUDICIAL REMEDIES

The Act envisages various reliefs. It says that the Tribunal may, by
an order, provide relief and compensation to the victims of
pollution and other environmental damage arising under the
enactments specified in the Schedule-I to the Act, including
accident occurring while handling any hazardous substance. It
may also order the restitution of the property damaged and the
restitution of the environment for that areas as the Tribunal may
think fit. The relief under this Act is an addition to the relief given
under the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991. The Act seeks to
discourage delayed applications for relief. If stipulates that no
application for the above mentioned categories of relief would be
entertained by the Tribunal unless it is made within a period of five
years from the date on which the cause for such relief first arose.
However, the Tribunal may allow further sixty days for the
application to be filed if it is satisfied that the applicant was
prevented by sufficient cause from filing such application. The Act
obligates the claimants under the Act to intimate to the Tribunal
about the application filed to, or as the case may be, compensation
or relief received from, any other court or authority. The Act
provides for an expeditious relief and obligates the Tribunal to
endeavour to dispose of the application or, the case may be, an
appeal finally within six months from the date of filing the
application, or, as the case may be, the appeal, after providing the
parties an opportunity to be heard.

16 | P a g e
The Act provides that an application for grant of relief or
compensation or settlement of dispute may be made to 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. 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.

17 | P a g e
 PENALITY

This Act bestows ample power on the Green Tribunal if its orders
are not complied with; to impose penalty which may be either three
years prison or up to ten crores and for companies it may extend
up to twenty five crores. The act adopts a tough posture against
companies. If it is proved that the offence has been committed with
the consent or connivance of, or is attributable to any neglect on
the part of any director, manager, secretary or other officer of the
company, such director, manager, secretary or other officers shall
also be deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be
proceeded against and punished accordingly.

This is a commendable inclusion in the bill and at least it will instill

sense of fear among higher officials of company to pay due
attention to environmental performance of their company. But the
accused can take defence that he did not have the knowledge or he
has taken all the due care to prevent the commission of the offence.
Hence, this strong inclusion is diluted.

18 | P a g e
 STRENGTHS

 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.

19 | P a g e
 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’.”

 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.

20 | P a g e
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”.

21 | P a g e
 CASE LAWS
CASE- 1. Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs Union Of India & Ors on
28 August, 1996

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

WRIT JURISDICTION
VELLORE CITIZENS WELFARE FORUM VS UNION OF INDIA & ORS
JUDGEMENT DATED 28.08.1996

VELLORE CITIZENS WELFARE FORUM ...Petitioner

versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ...Respondents
CORAM:
HON'BLE JUSTICE KULDIP SINGH, FAIZAN UDDIN, K. VENKATASWAMI

 FACTS
 The affidavits filed on behalf of State of Tamil Nadu and the Board clearly
indicate that the tanneries and other polluting industries in the State of
Tamil Nadu are being persuaded for the last about 10 years to control the
pollution generated by them. They were given option either to construct
common effluent treatment plants for a cluster of industries or to set up
individual pollution control devices. The Central Government agreed to give
substantial subsidy for the construction of common effluent treatment
plants (CETPs). It is a pity that till date most of the tanneries operating in
the State of Tamil Nadu have not taken any step to Control the Pollution
caused by the discharge of effluent. This Court on MAY 1, 1995 passed a
detailed order. In the said order this Court noticed various earlier orders
passed by this Court and finally directed as under.

 Mr. R. Mohan, learned senior counsel for the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control
Board has placed before us a consolidated statement dividing the 553
industries into three parts. The first part in Statement No.1 and the second
part in Statement No.2 relate to those tanneries who have set up the

22 | P a g e
 Effluent Treatment Plants either individually or collectively to the
satisfaction of the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board. According to the
report placed on the record by the Board, these industries in Statements 1
and 2 have not achieved the standard or have not started functioning to the
satisfaction of the Board. So far as the industries in Statements 1 and 2 are
concerned, we give them three months notice from today to complete the
setting up of Effluent Treatment Plant (either individually or collectively)
failing which they shall be liable to pollution fine on the basis of their past
working and also liable to be closed. We direct the Tamil Nadu Pollution
Control Board to issue individual notices to all these industries within two
weeks from today. The Board is also directed to issue a general notice on
three consecutive days in a local newspaper which has circulation in the
District concerned.

 So far as the 57 tanneries listed in Statement III (including 12 industries

who have filed writ petition, Nos. of which have been given above) are
concerned, these units have not installed and commissioned the Effluent
Treatment Plants despite various orders issued by this Court from time to
time. Mr. R. Mohan, learned senior counsel appearing for Tamil Nadu
Pollution Control Board states that the Board has issued separate notices
to these units directing them to set up the Effluent Treatment Plants.
Keeping in view the fact that this Court has been monitoring the matter for
the last about four years and various orders have been issued by this Court
from time to time, there is no justification to grant any further time to these
industries. We, therefore, direct the- 57 industries listed hereunder to be
closed with immediate effect. ...... We direct the District Collector and the
Senior Superintendent of Police of the District to have our orders complied
with immediately. Both these Officers shall file a report in This Court within
one week of the receipt of the order. We give opportunity to these 57
industries to approach this ' court as and when any steps towards the
setting up of Effluent treatment Plants their plants and their commissioning
have been taken by these industries. If any of the industries wish to be

23 | P a g e
 relocated to some other area they may come out with a proposal in that
respect.

 On July 28,1995 this Court suspended the closure order in respect or seven
industries mentioned therein for a period of eight weeks. It was further
observed as under;-

"Mr. G . Ramaswamy, learned senior advocate appearing for some of the

tanneries in Madras states that the setting up of the effluent treatment plants
is progressing satisfactorily. According to him several lacs have already been
spent and in a short time it would start operating. Mr. Mohan, learned
counsel for the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board will inspect that project
and file a report by 3rd August, 1995".

 ISSUES
 THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 1996 Present:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh Hon'ble Mr. Justice Faizan Uddin Hon'Ble
Mr, Justice K. Venkataswami R. Mohan, V.A. Bobde, Kapil Sibal, M.R.
Sharma, V.C. Mahajan, and S.S. Ray, Sr. Advs., K.R.R. Pillai, M.C. Mehta,
Ms. Seema Midha, V.G. Pragasam, Vijay Panjwani, S. Sukumaran, Sudhir
Walia, A.T.M. Sampath, M.S. Dahiya,(Sudhir Walia, Roy Abraham, Advs. for
Sm. Baby Krishna, P. Sukumar, Praveen Kumar, Romesh C. Pathak M.A.
Krishnamurthy, V. Krishnamurthy, Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Ms. Indra Sawhney,
Deepak Diwan, S.M, Jadhev, A.V. Rangam, Zafarullah Khan, Shahid Rizvi,
Shakil Ahmed Syed, Jaideep Gupta and Sanjay Hegde, Advs. with them for
the appearing parties.

 This petition - public interest - under Article 32 of the Constitution of India

has been filed by Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum and is directed against the
pollution which is being caused by enormous discharge of untreated
effluent by the tanneries and other industries in the State of Tamil Nadu. It
is stated that the tanneries are discharging untreated effluent into
agricultural fields to, road-Sides, Water ways and open lands. The
untreated effluent is finally discharged in river Palar which is the main
source of water supply to the residents of the area. According to the

24 | P a g e
petitioner the entire surface and sub-soil water of river Palar has been
polluted resulting in non availability Potable water to the residents of the
area. It is stated that the tanneries in the State of Tamil Nadu have caused
environmental degradation in the area. According to the preliminary survey
made by the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Research Center Vellore
nearly 35,000 hectares of agricultural land in the Tanneries Belt, has
become either partially or totally unfit for cultivation. It has been further
stated in the petition that the tanneries use about 170 types of chemicals
in the chrome tanning processes. The said chemicals include sodium
chloride, lime, sodium sulphate, chlorium sulphate, fat liquor Amonia and
sulphuric acid besides dyes which are used in large quantities. Nearly 35
litres of water is used for processing one kilogram of finished leather,
resulting in dangerously enormous quantities of toxic effluents being let out
in the open by the tanning industry. These effluents have spoiled the
physico-chemical properties of the soil, and have contaminated ground
water by percolation. According to the petitioner an independent survey
conducted by Peace Members, a non governmental organisation, covering
13 villages of Dindigal and Peddiar Chatram Anchayat Unions, reveals that
350 wells out of total of 467 used for drinking and irrigation purposes have
been polluted. Women and children have to walk miles to get drinking
water. Legal Aid and Advice Board of Tamil Nadu requested two lawyers
namely, M.R, Ramanan and P.S. Subramanium to visit the area and submit
a report indicating the extent of pollution caused by the tanneries. Relevant
part of the report is as under :

"As per the Technical Report dated 28.5.1983 of the Hydrological

Investigations carried out in Solur village near Ambur it was noticed that 176
chemicals including acids were contained in the Tannery effluents. If 40 litres
of water with chemicals are required for one Kilo of Leather, with the
production of 200 tons of leather per day at present and likely to be increased
multifold in the next four to five years with the springing up of more tanneries
like mushroom in and around Ambur Town, the magnitude of the effluent
water used with chemicals and acids let out daily can be shockingly
imagined. The effluents are let out from the tanneries in the nearby lands,
25 | P a g e
 then to Goodar and Palar rivers. The lands, the rivulet and the river receive
the effluents containing toxic chemicals and acids. The sub soil water is
polluted ultimately affecting not only arable lands, wells used for agriculture
but also drinking water wells. The entire Ambur Town and the villages
situated nearby do not have good drinking water. Some of the influential and
rich people are able to get drinking water from a far off place connected by a
few pipes. During rainy days and floods, the chemicals deposited into the
rivers and lands spread out quickly to other lands. The effluents thus let out,
affect cultivation, either crops do not come up at all or if produced the yield is
reduced abnormally too low. ........ The Tanners have come to stay. The
industry is a Foreign Exchange Earner. But one moot point is whether all the
cost of the lives of lakhs of people with increasing human population the
activities of the tanneries should be encouraged on monetary considerations.
We find that the tanners have absolutely no regard for the healthy
environment in and around their tanneries. The effluents discharged have
been stored like a pond openly in the most of the places adjacent to cultivable
lands with easy access for the animals and the people. The Ambur
Municipality, which can exercise its powers as per the provisions of the
Madras District Municipalities Act (1920) more particularly under Sections
226 to 231, 249 to 253 and 338 to 342 seems to be a silent spectator probably
it does not want to antagomise the highly influential and stupendously rich
tanners. The powers given under Section 63 of the Water Prevention and
Control of Pollution Act 1974 (6 of 1974) have not been exercised in the case
of tanneries in Ambur and the surrounding areas."

 In the affidavit dated January 9, 1992 filed by Member Secretary, Tamil

Nadu Pollution Control Board (the board), it has been stated as under :

"It is submitted that there are 584 tanneries in North Arcot Ambedkar District
vide annexure 'A' and 'D'. Out of which 443 Tanneries have applied for
consent of the Board. The Government were concerned with the treatment
and disposal of effluent from tanneries. The Government gave time upto
31.7.1985 to tanneries to put up Effluent Treatment Plant (E.T.P.). So far 33
tanneries in North Arcot Ambedkar District have put up Effluent Treatment

26 | P a g e
 Plant. The Board has stipulated standards for the effluent to be disposed by
the tanneries."

 ANALYSIS OF THE LAW

 The precautionary principle and the polluter pays principle have been
accepted as part of the law of the land. Article 21 of the Constitution of India
guarantees protection of life and personal liberty. Articles 47,
48A and 51A(g) of the Constitution are as under:

"47. Duty of the State to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living
and to improve public health. The State shall regard the raising of the level of
nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of
public health as among its primary duties and in particular, The State shall
endeavour to bring about prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal
purposes of intoxicating drinks and of drugs which are injurious to health.
48A. (g) Protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding of
forests and wild life. The State shall endeavour to protect and improve the
environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country.

51A.(g) To protect and improve the natural environment including forests,

takes, rivers and wild life, and to have compassion for living creatures."

 Apart from the constitutional mandate to protect and improve the

environment there are plenty of post independence legislations on the
subject but more relevant enactments for our purpose are: The Water
(Prevention and Control of Pollution Act 1974 (the Water Act), The Air
(Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 (the Air Act) and the
Environment Protection Act 1986 (the Environment Act). The Water
Act provides for the constitution of the Central Pollution Control Board by
the Central Government and the constitution of one State Pollution Control
boards by various State Governments in the country. The Boards function
under the control of the Governments concerned. The Water Act prohibits
the use or streams and wells for disposal of polluting matters. Also provides
for restrictions on outlets and discharge of effluents without obtaining
consent from the Board. Prosecution and penalties have been provided

27 | P a g e
 which include sentence of imprisonment. The Air Act provides that the
Central Pollution Control Board and the State Pollution Control Boards
constituted under the later Act shall also perform the powers and functions
under the Air Act. The main function of the Boards, under the Air Act, is to
improve the quality of the air and to prevent. control and abate air pollution
in the country. We shall deal with the Environment Act in the later part of
this judgement.

 The Constitutional and statutory provision protect a persons right to fresh

air, clean water and pollution free environment, but the source of the right
is the inalienable common law right of clean environment. It would be useful
to quote a paragraph from Blackstone's commentaries on the Laws of
England (Commentaries on the Laws of England of Sir Willian Blackstone)
[Link], fourth edition published in 1876. Chapter XIII, "Of Nuisance" depicts
the law on the subject in the following words :

"Also, if a person keeps his hogs, or other noisome animals, 'or allows filth to
accumulate on his premises, so near the house of another, that the stench
incommodes him and makes the air unwholesome, this is an injurious
nuisance, as it tends to deprive him of the use and benefit of his house. A like
injury is, if one's neighbour sets up and exercises any offensive trade; as a
tanner's, a tallow chandler's, or the like; for though these are lawful and
necessary trades, yet they should be exercised in remote places; for the rule
is, sic utere "tuo, ut alienum non laedas;" this therefore is an actionable
nuisance. 'And on a similar principle a constant ringing of bells in one's
immediate neighbourhood may be a nuisance With regard to other corporeal
heriditaments; it is a nuisance to stop or divert water that used to run to
another's meadow or mill; to corrupt or poison a water-course, by erecting a
due house or a lime-pit, for the use of trade, in the upper part of the stream;
'to pollute a pond. from which another is entitled to water his cattle: to obstruct
a drain; or in short to do any act in common property, that in its consequences
must necessarily tend to the prejudice of one's neighbour. So closely does the
law of England enforce that excellant rule of gospel-morality, of "doing to
others. as we would they should do unto ourselves ."

28 | P a g e
 Sections 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8 of the Environment Act which are relevant are as
under :

"3. Power of Central Government to take measures to protect and improve

environment - (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act the Central, Government
shall have till power to take all such measures as it deems necessary or
expedient for the purpose of protecting improving the quality of the
environment and preventing controlling and abating environmental pollution.

(2) In particular, and without prejudice to the Generality of the provisions of

section (1), such measures may include measures with respect to all or any
of the following matters, namely :-

(i) co-ordination of actions by the State Governments, officers and other

authorities -

(a) under tis Act, or the rules made thereunder, or

(b) under any other law for the time being in force which is relatable to the
objects of this Act;

(ii) planning and execution of a nation-wide programme for the prevention,

control and abatement of environmental pollution;

(iii) laying down standards for the quality of environment in its various
aspects;

(iv) laying down standards for the emission or discharge of environmental

pollutants from various sources whatsoever :

Provided that different standards for emission or discharge may be laid down
under this clause from different sources having regard to the quality or
composition of the emission or discharge of environmental pollutants from
such sources :

(v) restriction of areas in which any industries, operation or processes or class

of industries, operations or processes shall not be carried out or shall be
carried out object to certain safeguards;

29 | P a g e
 vi) laying down procedures and safeguards for the prevention of accidents
which may cause environmental pollution and remedial measures for such
accidents;

(vii) lying down procedures and safeguards for the handling of hazardous
substances;

(viii) examination of such manufacturing processes, materials and substances

as are likely to cause environmental pollution;

(ix) carrying out and sponsoring investigations and research relating to

problems of environmental pollution;

(x) Inspection of any premises, plant, equipment, machinery, manufacturing

or other processes, material or substances and giving, by order, of such
direction to such authorities, officers or persons as it may consider necessary
to take steps for the prevention, control and abatement of environmental
pollution;

(xi) establishment or recognition or environmental laboratories and institutes

to carry out the functions entrusted to such environmental laboratories and
institutes under this Act;

(xii) collection and dissemination of information in respect of matters relating

to environmental pollution;

(xiii) preparation of manuals, codes or guides relating to the prevention,

control and abatement of environmental pollution;

(xiv) such other matters as the Central Government deems necessary or

expedient for the purpose of securing the effective implementation of the
provisions of this Act.

 The Central Government may, if it considers it necessary or expedient so to

do for the purposes of this Act, by order, published in the powers and
functions (including the power to issue directions under Section 5 ) of the
Central Government under this act and for taking measures with respect to
such of the matters referred to in sub-section (2) as may be mentioned in
the order and subject to the supervision and control of the Central
30 | P a g e
 government and the provisions of such order, such authority or authorities
may exercise the powers or perform the functions or take the measures so
mentioned in the order as if such authority or authorities had been
empowered by this Act to exercise those powers or perform those functions
or take such measures.

 Appointment or officers and their powers and functions (1) without

prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 3, the Central
Government may appoint officers with such designations as it thinks fit for
the purposes of this Act and may entrust to them such of the powers and
functions under this Act as it may deem fit.

(2) The officers appointed under sub-section (1) shall be subject to the general
control and direction of the Central Government or, if so directed by that
Government, also of the authority or authorities, if any, constituted under sub-
section (3) of section 3 of any other authority or officer".

Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law but subject to the

provisions of this Act, the Central Government may, in the exercise of its
powers and performance of its functions under this Act, issue direction in
writing to any person, officer or any authority and such person, officer or
authority shall be bound to comply with such directions.

Explanation. - for the avoidance of doubts, it is hereby declared that the

power to issue directions under this section includes the power to direct ---

(a) the closure, prohibition or regulation of any industry, operation or process;

or

(b) stoppage or regulation of the supply of electricity or water or any other

service.

 Persons carrying on industry, operation etc. not to allow emission or

discharge of environmental pollutants in excess of the standards. No.
person carrying on any industry, operation or process shall discharge or
emit or permit to be discharged or emitted any environmental pollutant in
excess of such standards as may be prescribed.

31 | P a g e
 It is thus obvious that the Environment Act contains useful provisions for
controlling pollution. The main purpose of the Act is to create an authority
or authorities under Section 3(3) of the Act with adequate powers to control
pollution and protect the environment. It is a pity that till date no authority
has been constituted by the Central Government. The work which is
required to be done by an authority in terms of Section 3(3) read with other
provision of the Act is being done by this Court and the other Courts in the
country. It is high time that the Central Government realises its
responsibility and statutory duty to protect the degrading environment in
the country. If the conditions in the five districts of Tamil Nadu, where
tanneries are operating, are permitted to continue then in the near future
all rivers/canals shall be polluted, underground waters contaminated,
agricultural lands turned barren and the residents of the area exposed to
serious diseases. lt is, therefore, necessary for this Court to direct the
Central Government to take immediate action under the provisions of
the Environment Act.

 The Ministry of Environment and forests (MEF) has not categorically laid
down standards for inland surface water discharge for total dissolved solids
(TDS), sulphates and chlorides. The Decision on these standards rests with
the respective state Pollution Control Boards as per the requirements based
on local site conditions. The standards stipulated by the TNPCB are justified
on the aforereffered considerations.

 The Board has Power under the Environment Act and the Rules to lay down
standards for emissions or discharge of environmental Pollutants. Rule 3(2)
of the Rules even permit the Board to specify more stringent standards from
those provided under the Rules. The NEERI having justified the standards
stipulated by the Board, We direct that these standards are to be
maintained by the tanneries and other industries in the State of Tamil
Nadu.

32 | P a g e
 CONCLUSION/JUDGEMENT
 Consequently the polluting industries are "absolutely liable to compensate
for the harm caused by them to villagers in the affected area, to the soil and
to the underground water and hence, they are bound to take all necessary
measures to remove sludge and other pollutants lying in the affected areas".
The "Polluter Pays" principle as interpreted by this Court means that the
absolute liability for harm to the environment extends not only to
compensate the victims of pollution but also the cost of restoring the
environmental degradation. Remediation of the damaged environment is
part of the process of "Sustainable Development" and as such polluter is
liable to pay the cost to the individual sufferers as well as the cost of
reversing the damaged ecology.

 In view of the above mentioned constitutional and statutory provisions we

have no hesitation in holding that the precautionary principle and the
polluter pays pcinciple are part of the environmental law of the country.
Persons handling hazardous substances to comply with procedural
safeguards. - No person shall handle or cause to be handled any hazardous
substance except in accordance with such procedure end after complying
with such safeguards as may be prescribed".

 Annexure-I to the Notification includes Distilleries, tanneries, fertilizer,

steel plants and foundries as the highly polluting industries. We have our
doubts whether the above quoted government order is being enforced by the
Tamil Nadu Government. The order has been issued to control pollution
and protect the environment. We are of the view that the order should be
strictly enforced and no industry listed in Annexure-l to the order should
be permitted to be set up in the prohibited area.

 Keeping in view the scenario discussed by us in this judgment, we order

and direct as Under:-

a) The Central Government shall constitute an authority under Section 3(3) of

the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and shall confer on the said

33 | P a g e
 authority all the powers necessary to deal with the situation created by the
tanneries and other polluting industries in the State of Tamil Nadu. The
Authority shall be headed by a retired judge of the High Court and it may
have other members- preferably with expertise in the field of pollution
control and environment protection- to be appointed by the Central
Government. The Central Government shall confer on the said authority the
powers to issue directions under Section 5 of the Environment Act and for
taking measures with respect to the matters referred to in Clause (v), (vi)
(vii) (viii)(ix) (x) and (xii) of Sub-Section (2) of Section 3. The Central
Government shall consitute the authority before September 30, 1996.

b) The authority so constituted by the Central Government shall implement

the "precautionary principle" and the "polluter pays" principle. The
authority shall, with the help of expert opinion and after giving opportunity
to the concerned polluters assess the loss to the ecology\environment in
the affected areas and shall also identify the individuals/families who have
suffered because of the pollution and shall assess the compensation to be
paid to the said individuals/families. The authority shall further determine
the compensation to be recovered from the polluters as cost of reversing the
damaged environment. The authority shall lay down just and fair procedure
for completing the exercise.

c) The authority shall compute the compensation under two heads namely,
for reversing the ecology and for payment to individuals. A statement
showing the total amount to be recovered, the names of the polluters from
who the amount is to be recovered, the amount to be recovered from each
polluter, the persons to who the compensation is to be paid and the amount
payable to each of them shall be forwarded to the Collector\District
Magistrates of the area concerned. The Collector\District magistrate shall
recover the amount from the polluters, if necessary, as arrears of land
revenue. He shall disburse the compensation awarded by the authority to
be affected persons/families.

34 | P a g e
d) An industry may have set up the necessary pollution control device at
present but it shall be liable to pay for the past pollution generated by the
said industry which has resulted in the environmental degradation and
suffering to the residents of the area.

e) We impose pollution fine of Rs. 10,000/- each on all the tanneries in the
districts of North Arcot Ambedkar, Erode Periyar, Dindigul Anna, Trichi and
Chengai M.G.R. The fine shall be paid before October 31, 1996 in the office
of the Collector/District Magistrate concerned. We direct the
Collectors/District Magistrates of these districts to recover the fines from
the tanneries. The money shall be deposited, alongwith the compensation
amount recovered from the polluters, under a separate head called
"Environment protection Fund" and shall be utilised for compensating the
affected persons as identified by the authorities and also for restoring the
damaged environment. The pollution fine is liable to the recovered as
arrears of land revenue. The tanneries which fail to deposit the amount by
October 31, 1996 shall be closed forthwith and shall also be liable under
the Contempt of Courts Act.

f) The authority, in consultation with expert bodies like NEERI, Central Board,
Board shall frame scheme/schemes for reversing the damage caused to the
ecology and environment by pollution in the State of Tamil Nadu. The
scheme/schemes so framed shall be executed by the State Government
under the supervision of the Central Government. The expenditure shall be
met from the "Environment protection fund" and from other sources
provided by the state Government and the Central Government.

g) We suspend the closure orders in respect of all the tanneries in the five
districts of North Arcot Ambedkar, Erode Periyar, Dindigul Anna, Trichi and
Chengai M.G.R. We direct all the tanneries in the above five districts to set
up CETPs or Individual Pollution control Devices on or before November 30,
1996. Those connected with CETPs shall have to install in addition the
primary devices in the tanerries. All the tanneries in the above five districts
shall obtain the consent of the Board to function and operate with effect

35 | P a g e
 from December 15, 1996. The tanneries who are refused consent or who fail
to obtain the consent of the Board by December 15, 1996 shall be closed
forthwith.

h) The Government Order No. 213 dated March 30, 1989 shall be enforced
forthwith. No. new industry listed in Annexure-I to the Notification shall be
permitted to be set up within the prohibited area. The authority shall review
the case of all the industries which are already operating in the prohibited
area and it would be open to authority to direct the relocation of any of such
industries.

i) The standards stipuated by the Board regarding total dissolved solids (TDS)
and approved by the NEERI shall be operative. All the tanneries and other
industries in the State of Tamil Nadu shall comply with the said standards.
The quality of ambient waters has to be maintained through the standards
stipulated by the Board.
 We have issued comprehensive directions for achieving the end result in
this case. It is not necesary for this Court to monitor these matters any
further. we are of the view that the Madras High Court would be in a better
position to monitor these matters hereinafter. We, therefore, request the
Chief Justice of the Madras High Court to constitute a special Bench "Green
bench" to deal with this case and other environmental matters. We make it
clear that it would be open to the Bench to pass any appropriate
order/orders keeping in view the directions issued by us. We may mention
that "Green Benches" are already functioning in Calcutta, Madhya Pradesh
and some other High Courts. We Direct the Registry of this Court to send
the records to the registry of the Madras High matter as a petition
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and deal with it in accordance
with law and also in terms of the directions issued by us. We give liberty to
the parties to approach the High Court as and when necessary.
 Mr. M.C. Mehta has been assisting this Court to our utmost satisfaction.
We place on record our appreciation for Mr. Mehta. We direct the State of
Tamil Nadu to pay Rs. 50,000/- towards legal fees and other out of pocket
expenses incurred by Mr. Mehta.
36 | P a g e
CASE- 2. GUJARAT STATE POLLUTION BOARD VS UNION OF INDIA ON 22
FEBRUARY, 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

GUJARAT STATE POLLUTION BOARD VS UNION OF INDIA
WRIT PETITION NO.1124 OF 2023
JUDGEMENT DATED 22.02.2024

HIKAL LTD. ...Petitioner

versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ...Respondents
CORAM:
HON'BLE JUSTICE KULDIP SINGH, FAIZAN UDDIN, K. VENKATASWAMI

 FACTS
 By an interim order dated 24th March 2023, the parties to the writ petition
were directed not to act upon the order passed by the Principal Bench,
National Green Tribunal, New Delhi accepting the reports dated 31st May
2022 and 4th June 2022 for a period of one week. The said interim order
was continued by the orders dated 30 th March 2023, 13th April 2023, 25th
April 2023, 14th June 2023 and 7th July 2023. Though the writ petition
was to be considered on 21st July 2023, it was placed before the Court only
on 6th December 2023 for considering Interim Application (Lodging)
No.30428 of 2023 moved by the second respondent-Gujarat State Pollution
Board for vacating the interim order dated 24 th March 2023. The Court
observed that from the record it could be seen that the interim order dated
24th March 2023 was not continued after 21 st July 2023. On that premise,
it was held that the prayer for vacating the interim order would not arise
and hence no orders were required in that regard. The said Interim
Application was disposed of.

37 | P a g e
 To consider the issue with regard to the maintainability of the writ petition
in the light of the objection as taken, it would be necessary to briefly refer
to the relevant facts giving rise to the present proceedings. It is the case of
the petitioner that it is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of
Agro Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals having its Units at Taloja and Mahad
within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. It also has its units in the
State of Gujarat and Karnataka. On 30 th December 2021, the petitioner
claims that Sangam Enviro Pvt. Ltd. [Link] Dixit approached
it with a view to process and sell NaHS 16-18% Solution to industries in
Gujarat and Rajasthan. Accordingly, the petitioner supplied the aforesaid
Solution from its Plant at Taloja. On 6 th January 2022, at about 4:00 a.m.,
the tanker that was carrying the said Solution discharged liquid chemicals
into a stream at Sachin, Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation,
Surat. As a result of such discharge, six persons lost their lives while about
twenty others suffered injuries. This incident was reported in the
newspapers on 7 th January 2022. The seventh respondent - Brackish
Water Research Centre filed Original Application No.5/2022 before the
Western Zone of the National Green Tribunal ("NGT"), Pune drawing it's
attention to the aforesaid incident since the said incident had occurred
within it's territorial jurisdiction. The Principal Bench of NGT, New Delhi
took suo motu cognizance of the newspaper report dated 7 th January 2022
and issued notice to the Central Pollution Control Board; Collector &
District Magistrate, Surat, Gujarat; Maharashtra Pollution Control Board
as well as the seventh respondent. The suo motu proceedings were
registered as Original Application No.5/2022.

 On 18th January 2022, the Principal Bench of NGT proceeded to constitute

a Nine-Member Joint Committee to ascertain the sequence of events, causes
of failure, identify persons as well as Authorities responsible for the same,
extent of damage caused to life and environment along with other ancillary
aspects. It further directed that on the basis of report to be WP-1124-
[Link] Dixit submitted within a period of two months, the State Pollution
Control Board as well as the Collector and District Magistrate would take

38 | P a g e
 further steps to recover and pay compensation to the victims and also
restore the environment. It granted liberty to the Project Proponent, the
petitioner, to move the NGT if it was aggrieved by any of the actions of the
statutory regulator taken pursuant to the said order.

 Mr. Janak Dwarkadas, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner submitted
that the Principal Bench of NGT had no jurisdiction whatsoever to transfer
to itself proceedings that had been filed by the seventh respondent at the
Western Zone of NGT. On 18 th January 2022, the Western Zone of NGT
was available at Pune when the Principal Bench proceeded to transfer the
said proceedings at New Delhi. Referring to the judgment of the Full Bench
of this Court in The Goa Foundation Vs. The National Green Tribunal,
Principal Bench, New Delhi and Ors., decided on 21st September 2022, it
was submitted that such transfer of proceedings by the NGT was contrary
to law. Referring to the order dated 18 th October 2022 in Petition for
Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.17931/2022 that arose from the challenge
to the judgment of the Full Bench in The Goa Foundation (supra), it was
submitted that matters pertaining to the jurisdiction of the Western Zone
ought to be heard only by the Western Zone Bench sitting at Pune. It was
then submitted that this Court had jurisdiction to entertain the present writ
petition in view of Article 226(2) of the Constitution of India notwithstanding
the fact that the orders impugned were passed by the Principal Bench of
the NGT. Since the cause [Link] Dixit of action qua the original
proceedings occurred within the territorial jurisdiction of the Western Zone,
the matter pertained to the Western Zone Bench at Pune. Since the
Principal Bench of NGT had no authority in law to transfer to itself the
proceedings pending before the Western Zone, the petitioner had rightly
invoked the jurisdiction of this Court. Moreover, the petitioner's factory was
located in Maharashtra and the civil consequences flowing from the
impugned orders were suffered at the registered office of the Petitioner in
Mumbai. On this basis also, the territorial jurisdiction lay with the Western
Zone of NGT.

39 | P a g e
 ISSUES
 The challenge raised in this writ petition, filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, is to the order dated 18 th January 2022 passed by
the Principal Bench of the National Green Tribunal, New Delhi taking suo
motu cognizance of a newspaper report dated 7 th January 2022 published
in daily "The Indian Express" reporting the death of six persons and
rendering about twenty persons to be sick in view of a gas leak at the
industrial area in Surat. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated
23rd September 2022 passed by the Principal Bench, National Green
Tribunal, New Delhi, wherein the report of the Joint Committee that was
constituted pursuant to the earlier order dated 18th January 2022 came to
be considered and various directions came to be issued. During pendency
of the writ petition, another order dated 24 th March 2023 passed by the
Principal Bench, National Green Tribunal, New Delhi issuing further WP-
[Link] Dixit directions in the matter of compensating victims of the
said gas leak is also under challenge by amending the writ petition. The
petitioner further seeks a declaration that the Principal Bench, National
Green Tribunal, New Delhi lacks territorial jurisdiction to hear Original
Application No.5 of 2022 as well as Miscellaneous Application No.46 of 2022
since it is only the Western Zone of the said Tribunal that has territorial
jurisdiction to consider the proceedings.

 It is urged by the petitioner that since part of cause of action for preferring
the writ petition arises within the territorial limits of this Court under Article
226(2) of the Constitution of India, the writ petition may be entertained. In
paragraph 61 of the writ petition, it has been pleaded as under :-

"The Petitioner thus submits that in light of the said orders transferring
matters from jurisdiction of the Hon'ble Principal Bench of NGT at New
Delhi to the Hon'ble NGT Bench at Pune, Maharashtra, this Hon'ble Court
will have ample jurisdiction to deal with the present issue raised in this
Petition. Moreover, the Petitioner has its registered office in Mumbai i.e.
within the original jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court. Thus, this Hon'ble
Court has the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution

40 | P a g e
 of India, which jurisdiction is very wide and cannot be limited or fettered,
including by a direct appeal to the Hon'ble Supreme Court."

 ANALYSIS OF THE LAW

 Having found that the prayers made in the writ petition could be examined
in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, it
would now be necessary to examine as to whether the writ petition ought to
be entertained despite the fact that an efficacious alternate remedy
under Section 22 of the Act of 2010 is available to the petitioner. It is not in
dispute that an order passed by the NGT can be subjected to challenge by
way of an appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court under Section 22 of the
Act of 2010. It is thus clear that a statutory remedy under Section 22 of the
Act of 2010 is available to the petitioner for challenging the orders passed
by the Principal Bench of NGT. However, that by itself cannot be a reason
not to entertain the writ petition. According to the petitioner,
notwithstanding aforesaid, since the Principal Bench of NGT had no
jurisdiction whatsoever to transfer to itself the proceedings filed by the
seventh respondent before the Western Zone of NGT, the challenge based
on a jurisdictional issue having been raised by the petitioner ought to be
examined in the writ petition. An order without jurisdiction could always be
subjected to challenge under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of
India and the fact that an alternate statutory remedy was available would
not preclude the constitutional court from examining such challenge.

 COURT'S REASONING
 This writ petition was filed on 15 th November 2022 challenging the orders
dated 18th January 2022 and 23rd September 2022. During pendency of
the writ petition, the NGT on 24 th March 2023 considered the suo motu
proceedings in the matter of remedial action that was directed to be taken
in view of violation of environmental norms. It proceeded to accept the
recommendations of the Committee in the matter of grant of compensation
to the legal heirs of the deceased as well as the injured. It WP-1124-
[Link] Dixit accordingly directed the amount of compensation to be

41 | P a g e
 recovered and thereafter paid to the victims. By amending the writ petition,
the order dated 24th March 2023 has also been challenged.

 We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and with their
assistance, we have also perused the material on record. We have thereafter
given due consideration to the rival contentions. In the light of the objection
raised by the learned counsel for the respondents to the maintainability of
the writ petition, it would be necessary to consider the [Link]
Dixit said aspect at the outset. According to the respondents, the writ
petition is not maintainable as no part of cause of action has arisen within
the territorial limits of this Court. Secondly, it is urged that in view of the
provisions of Section 22 of the Act of 2010, an efficacious alternate remedy
is available for the petitioner to invoke.

 To consider this aspect, it is necessary to refer to the copy of the Cause List
of the Western Zone of NGT as well as the Principal Bench of NGT dated 6th
January 2022. The Cause List of the Western Zone indicates that six cases
were listed with the caption "through video conferencing". There is also a
note which states that "cases at serial nos.1 to 6 will be taken up for hearing
on 25th February 2022". Original Application No.5 of 2022 stated to be filed
by the seventh respondent is not shown in the Cause List dated 6th January
2022 before the Western Zone. [Link] Dixit . A perusal of the
Advance Cause List of the Principal Bench pertaining to Pune Zonal Bench
indicates that cases at serial nos.1 and 2 were to be taken through video
conference while case at serial no.3 was to be taken up for hearing on 16th
February 2022. It thus becomes clear that matters pertaining to Western
Zone were being considered at the Principal Bench of NGT while all the six
cases shown to be listed on 6 th January 2022 before the Western Zone of
NGT at Pune stood adjourned to 25 th February 2022. From these Cause
Lists, it becomes clear that no proceedings were entertained by the Western
Zone at Pune on 6 th January 2022. On the other hand, matters pertaining
to the Western Zone were considered through video conference at the
Principal Bench. In addition, it may be stated that in the Cause List relating
to Western Zone, Original Application No.5 of 2022 had not been listed. It
42 | P a g e
 thus becomes clear that on 6th January 2022, the Western Zone of NGT at
Pune did not consider any matters that were listed since the learned
Members were not shown to be available.

 The Principal Bench on 7th January 2022 took suo motu cognizance of the
incident / accident that occurred at Surat on 6 th January 2022. The said
proceedings were registered as Original Application No.5 of 2022 at the
Principal Bench in re: News item published in The Indian Express dated
07.01.2022 titled "Gujarat : At least 06 dead, 20 sick after gas leak WP-
[Link] Dixit at industrial area in Surat". On 10 th January 2022,
notice was issued to various parties. On 11th January 2022, the seventh
respondent filed an interlocutory application being Interim Application No.8
of 2022 seeking impleadment of the sixth respondent. It is thereafter that
on 18 th January 2022 the Principal Bench, NGT passed its order issuing
various directions including constitution of a Nine-Member Joint
Committee. . From the aforesaid, it becomes clear that suo motu cognizance
of a newspaper report dated 7th January 2022, as published in "The Indian
Express" was taken by the Principal Bench after which the matter has been
considered by it on various dates. From the material on record, it can be
seen that prior to the Principal Bench taking suo motu cognizance of the
incident / accident dated 6th January 2022, the Western Zone of NGT was
not functioning on 6th January 2022 nor has it been shown that prior to
the Principal Bench taking cognizance of the matter, the same was being
considered by the Western Zone. The contention as urged on behalf of the
petitioner that since the Western Zone was also seized of the proceedings
relating to the incident / accident dated 6th January 2022, the Principal
Bench was not justified in taking suo motu cognizance and entertaining the
proceedings is not supported by the record before us.

 Though we find that a part of cause of action does arise within the territorial
limits of this Court, we are inclined to apply the doctrine of WP-1124-
[Link] Dixit forum conveniens in the facts of the present case for more
than one reason. The cognizance of the very same incident that occurred at
Surat, Gujarat has been taken in public interest by the Gujarat High Court
43 | P a g e
 and presently it is seized of the said proceedings. Further, there are about
six reports filed within the territorial limits of the Gujarat High Court that
seek to initiate criminal prosecution against the accused. The deaths as well
as injuries caused have occurred at Surat. The nine-member Joint
Committee, as appointed by the Principal Bench, NGT, comprises of
Members who are based at Surat and Ahmedabad. We also note that in the
present proceedings, the Gujarat State Pollution Board, Gujarat Industrial
Development Corporation, Collector and District Magistrate, Surat, Gujarat
are party-respondents. It would, therefore, be in the fitness of things that
the challenge as raised to the orders dated 8 th January 2022, 23rd
September 2022 and 24th March 2023 passed by the Principal Bench, NGT
is considered in appropriate proceedings before the Gujarat High Court.
That Court, in our view would be the appropriate Court to go into the issues
raised even in this writ petition. It would not only be convinient to the
litigating parties but would also serve the interest of justice obviating the
possibility of any conflicting orders being passed with regard to the larger
issue. Thus, taking an overall view of the matter, we are of the considered
opinion that though a part of the cause of action arises within the territorial
limits of this Court, we decline to entertain the writ WP-1124-2023 petition
by invoking the doctrine of forum convenient.

 CONCLUSION/ JUDGEMENT

 As laid down in Godrej Sara Lee Ltd (supra) it would be necessary WP-
[Link] Dixit to examine if any exceptional case has been made out
by the petitioner for entertaining the writ petition, notwithstanding the fact
that an alternate remedy is available. In this regard, it would be necessary
to refer to certain factual aspects as regards the mode and manner in which
the proceedings under the Act of 2010 originated. The incident / accident
is stated to have taken place on 6th January 2022. This resulted in
occurrence of six deaths and injuries to about twenty-three persons.
According to the petitioner, on the same day the seventh respondent filed
Original Application No.5 of 2022 before the Western Zone of NGT at Pune.
The Western Zone exercises territorial jurisdiction over the areas of
44 | P a g e
 Maharashtra and Gujarat. According to the second respondent, at the
relevant time, the Western Zone of NGT was not functioning and the charge
of the said proceedings was with the Principal Bench at New Delhi.

 In view of aforesaid discussion, the present writ petition is not entertained

by invoking the doctrine of forum conveniens. The petitioner is free to seek
redressal of its grievances as raised in this writ petition by invoking such
remedies as are available in law. It is clarified that observations made in the
order are only for the purposes of examining whether this Court should
exercise discretion and entertain the writ petition in the present facts. All
contentions of the parties on merit are kept open except our finding that
the Principal Bench of NGT did not commit any jurisdictional error in taking
suo-motu congnizance of the incident/accident dated 6th January, 2022
on the premise that Original Application No.5 of 2022 had been filed by the
seventh respondent before the Western Zone Bench, Pune. The writ petition
is disposed of as not entertained on merits. Consequently, pending Interim
Applications are also disposed of. Rule stands discharged, leaving the
parties to bear their own costs.

 To enable the petitioner to invoke appropriate remedy, this judgment shall

operate on expiry of a period of four weeks from today till which time the
interim order dated 24 th March 2023 shall continue to operate without
prejudice to the rights of all parties.

45 | P a g e
 CONCLUSION

The Act is considered a critical step in capacity development

because the Act strengthens the framework of global
environmental governance. The judiciary has been the backbone
for developing a large body of environmental jurisprudence, even
though policy enforcement has been weak. A National Environment
Protection Authority is also to be established shortly to monitor the
implementation of environment laws.

Coming to dark side of the Act, the rules relating to constitution

and composition of selection committee tilts the balance of power
in favor of Central Government. Keeping in view the repeal of the
National Environment Tribunal Act, 1995 and the National
Environment Appellate Authority Act, 1997 by the present Act, it
is submitted that legislation should become operational in letter
and spirit to provide much needed relief against
offences/complaints for degradation of environment. It is further
suggested that in order to achieve more fruitful result the
environment court should be established in each state however, in
case of smaller States and Union Territories, one court for more
than one State or Union Territory may serve the purpose.

It is not uncommon for a statute to take a few years before it grows

into a strong and extensive statute. It is only through
interpretations and implementation over the years that the
strength and shortcomings become clear. The National Green
Tribunal Act, 2010 is in a nascent stage now and it is only with
time that its practicality and efficiency will be exposed.

46 | P a g e