A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan highlighted a “glaring error” in the NGT’s approach, emphasizing that it had relied exclusively on a joint committee report without independent evaluation.
New Delhi: On Dec 4: The Supreme Court ruled that tribunals must base their decisions on a comprehensive examination of all facts and circumstances, rather than relying solely on outsourced opinions. This verdict came while overturning an April 2021 National Green Tribunal (NGT) order.
A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan highlighted a “glaring error” in the NGT’s approach, emphasizing that it had relied exclusively on a joint committee report without independent evaluation.
“A tribunal must reach its decision by thoroughly considering the case’s facts and circumstances; it cannot outsource its opinion,” the bench stated.
The bench referenced the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in Kantha Vibhag Yuva Koli Samaj Parivartan Trust & Others v. State of Gujarat & Others, emphasizing that the NGT cannot delegate its adjudicatory responsibilities to expert committees.
In the present case, penalties were imposed on M/s Grasim Industries solely based on a joint committee’s report. The company, however, was neither included as a party nor notified before the NGT issued its order.
The NGT had imposed penalties on a firm for allegedly violating Environment Protection Act norms. However, the Supreme Court noted that the NGT’s process was flawed. Initially, the tribunal instructed the state pollution control board to examine the firm’s plant. Following this, it acted solely on the joint committee’s recommendations without giving the firm a chance to present its case.
The court underscored that the firm was neither included in the original NGT proceedings nor heard by the joint committee. Even when the firm applied to be made a party, the NGT rejected its request.
“It is evident that the NGT’s procedure violated established principles of natural justice,”
the bench observed.
The Supreme Court concluded that the NGT’s decision amounted to condemning the firm unheard, which is unacceptable. Consequently, it quashed the NGT’s order and sent the case back for reconsideration, ensuring the firm’s right to be heard.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
