National Green Tribunal Does Not Oust Jurisdiction Of High Courts; Direct Appeals From NGT To SC Do Not Undermine HCs : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the constitutionality of Section 3 of the National Green Tribunal Act 2010, which provides for the establishment of the NGT by the Central Government.The court also held that the National Green Tribunal under Section 14 & 22 of the NGT Act does not oust the High Court's jurisdiction under Article 226 & 227 as the same is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution. The bench of Justices KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy also held that the remedy of direct appeal to the Supreme Court under Section 22 of the NGT Act is intra vires the Constitution of India.Writ Petition/IssuesThe court made the above observations while rejecting a challenge made by the MP High Court Advocates Bar Association against Section 3 of the NGT. The writ petitioners, the Madhya Pradesh High Court Advocates Bar Association and the District Bar Association, had raised the following issues before the Apex Court in their writ petitionA.Whether the National Green Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the NGT") ousts the High Court's jurisdiction under Sections 14 & 22 of the NGT Act? B.Whether a seat of the NGT should be in every State? If yes, should they invariably be established at the principal seat of High Court, which in this case would be Jabalpur instead of Bhopal? C.Whether the remedy of direct appeal to the Supreme Court from the decisions of the NGT under Section 22 of the NGT Act is ultra vires to the Constitution? Whether an appeal mechanism be provided to the High Courts from the decisions of the NGT? D.Whether Section 3 of the NGT Act is ultra vires to the Constitution as suffering from the vice of excessive delegation?Section 3 NGT ActSection 3 of the NGT Act reads as follows :"3 Establishment of Tribunal. -The Central Government shall, by notification, establish, with effect from such date as may be specified therein, a Tribunal to be known as the National Green Tribunal* to exercise the jurisdiction, powers and authority conferred on such Tribunal by or under this Act".Not a case of excessive delegationThe petitioners had contended that Section 3 is a case of excessive delegation to the Union Government. Rejecting this contention, the bench observed:It must be borne in mind that the operationalization of the NGT, including the location of its Benches, was closely monitored by the Supreme Court. It is further seen that the Union Government is to specify the ordinary place of sitting of NGT and its territorial jurisdiction under Section 3 of the NGT Act being mindful of the demand for environment litigation within a particular territorial area. The Government is also to be guided by the objects of the Act as also the directions given by the Supreme Court from time to time. Since, the Government is acting on the issue with the guidance of this Court, and the Government is obliged to follow the objectives of the NGT Act, adequate safeguards are seen to guide the government. We are therefore of the opinion that Section 3 of the NGT Act is not a case of excessive delegationSelection Committee for the NGT clearly has judicial dominance.The court noted that the petitioners have relied on the judgment in Madras Bar Association vs. Union of India and Anr. (2014) 10 SCC 1 to contend that the NGT is neither accessible nor it is independent in dealing with environmental cases. In the said case, the Supreme Court struck down certain provisions of the National Tax Tribunal Act, 2005 ('NTT Act'). The court said:"Moreover, one must not overlook the distinction between the operation of the NTT Act vis-à-vis the NGT Act. To be specific, the NTT Act provided that the NTT would ordinarily sit at New Delhi. The NGT Act however provides for the creation of benches across the country. Additionally, the NTT was vested with the power of adjudicating appeals arising from orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on substantial questions of law. This was a jurisdiction that the High Courts were exercising under Article 227 in certain cases, and in that context, it was found that the NTT was indirectly impinging on the jurisdiction of the High Courts under Article 227. The jurisdiction exercised by the NGT is however distinct, and different, and not comparable. Also 21. glaring was the fact that Union Government had the power to transfer members of the NTT from one bench to another. No such provision exists in the NGT Act. Besides, the NTT was constituted only to determine substantial questions of law and it was unclear how accountants and other technical members with no legal training would deal with the issues raised in such matters. Those troubling issues do not arise in the NGT Act. One must also be cognizant of the fact that the Selection Committee under Section 7 of the NTT Act was dominated by two secretaries of the Government, as opposed to the Selection Committee for the NGT under the Tribunal Reforms Act which clearly has judicial dominance.The court therefore observed that there are striking ...

National Green Tribunal Does Not Oust Jurisdiction Of High Courts; Direct Appeals From NGT To SC Do Not Undermine HCs : Supreme Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

National Green Tribunal Does Not Oust Jurisdiction Of High Courts; Direct Appeals From NGT To SC Do Not Undermine HCs : Supreme Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers