9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (2) TMI 1938 - SC - Indian LawsRejection of renewal of consent to operate - Section 27 of the Water Act and Section 21 of the Air Act - HELD THAT - An appeal is a creature of statute and an appellate tribunal has to act strictly within the domain prescribed by statute. It is obvious that an appeal would lie from an order or decision of the appellate authority Under Section 28 of the Water Act to the NGT only Under Section 33B(a) of the Water Act read with Section 16(a) of the NGT Act. Similarly, an appeal would lie from an order or decision of the appellate authority Under Section 31 of the Air Act to the NGT only Under Section 31B of the Air Act read with Section 16(f) of the NGT Act. Obviously, since no order or decision had been made by the appellate authority under either the Water Act or the Air Act, any direct appeal against an original order to the NGT would be incompetent. NGT's jurisdiction being strictly circumscribed by Section 33B of the Water Act, read with Section 31B of the Air Act, read with Section 16(a) and (f) of the NGT Act, would make it clear that it is only orders or decisions of the appellate authority that are appealable, and not original orders. On the facts of the present case, it is clear that an appeal was pending before the appellate authority when the NGT set aside the original order dated 09.04.2018. This being the case, the NGT's order being clearly outside its statutory powers conferred by the Water Act, the Air Act, and the NGT Act, would be an order passed without jurisdiction. In the present case, it is clear that Section 16 of the NGT Act is cast in terms that are similar to Section 14(b) of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997, in that appeals are against the orders, decisions, directions, or determinations made under the various Acts mentioned in Section 16. It is clear, therefore, that under the NGT Act, the Tribunal exercising appellate jurisdiction cannot strike down Rules or Regulations made under this Act. Therefore, it would be fallacious to state that the Tribunal has powers of judicial review akin to that of a High Court exercising constitutional powers Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India - the State Government order made Under Section 18 of the Water Act, not being the subject matter of any appeal Under Section 16 of the NGT Act, cannot be judicially reviewed by the NGT. We are cognizant of the fact that the Respondent's plant has been shut down since 09.04.2018. Since we have set aside the impugned judgments of the NGT on the ground of maintainability, the order dated 22.01.2019 passed by the TNPCB, being a consequential order, is also set aside - Appeal disposed off.
Issues Involved:
1. Maintainability of appeals before the National Green Tribunal (NGT). 2. Jurisdiction of the NGT to entertain appeals against orders passed under the Water Act and Air Act. 3. Validity of the orders passed by the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB) and the Government of Tamil Nadu. Detailed Analysis: 1. Maintainability of Appeals Before the NGT: The primary issue was whether the appeals filed directly before the NGT were maintainable. The Supreme Court analyzed the statutory framework under the Water Act, Air Act, and NGT Act. It was emphasized that an appeal must first be filed before the appellate authority constituted under the respective Acts. Only decisions of the appellate authority are appealable to the NGT. The Court held that the NGT does not have jurisdiction to entertain direct appeals against original orders of the TNPCB, as such appeals bypass the statutory appellate mechanism. 2. Jurisdiction of the NGT: The Court examined the jurisdiction of the NGT under the Water Act and Air Act. It was found that: - Orders under Section 33A of the Water Act are appealable to the NGT. - Orders under Section 31A of the Air Act are not appealable to the NGT. The Court rejected the argument that composite orders (issued under both the Water Act and Air Act) could be split for appeal purposes. The statutory scheme does not allow for leapfrog appeals directly to the NGT, bypassing the appellate authority. 3. Validity of the Orders Passed by TNPCB and Government of Tamil Nadu: The Court addressed the validity of various orders passed by the TNPCB and the Government of Tamil Nadu: - The order dated 09.04.2018 by TNPCB rejecting renewal of consent to operate was pending before the appellate authority. The NGT's intervention was premature and without jurisdiction. - Orders dated 12.04.2018, 23.05.2018, and 28.05.2018 issued under Sections 33A and 31A were composite and could not be partially appealed to the NGT. - The order dated 28.05.2018 by the Government of Tamil Nadu under Section 18 of the Water Act was not appealable to the NGT. Such orders can only be challenged in a civil court or under Article 226 of the Constitution. Conclusion: The Supreme Court set aside the NGT's judgments on the ground of maintainability. The Respondent's plant closure orders were reinstated. The Respondents were directed to file a writ petition in the High Court for relief. The appeals were disposed of accordingly.
|
