2022 (6) TMI 1429 - SC - Indian Laws

Wilful disobedience - construction rampantly going on in blatant violation of the order of the High Court - HELD THAT - The government departments are no exception to the consequences of wilful disobedience of the orders of the Court. Violation of the orders of the Court would be its disobedience and would invite action in accordance with law. The orders passed by this Court are the law of the land in terms of Article 141 of the Constitution of India. No Court or Tribunal and for that matter any other authority can ignore the law stated by this Court. Such obedience would also be conducive to their smooth working otherwise there would be confusion in the administration of law and the respect for law would irretrievably suffer. There can be no hesitation in holding that the law declared by the higher court in the State is binding on authorities and tribunals under its superintendence and they cannot ignore it. In any case no law is necessary to state that insofar as the Tribunals are concerned they would be subordinate to the High Court insofar as the territorial jurisdiction of the High Court is concerned. A reference in this respect was also made to the judgment of the Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of L. CHANDRA KUMAR VERSUS UOI. 1994 (12) TMI 321 - SUPREME COURT . Thus it was not appropriate on the part of the learned NGT to have continued with the proceedings before it specifically when it was pointed that the High Court was also in seisin of the matter and had passed an interim order permitting the construction. The conflicting orders passed by the learned NGT and the High Court would lead to an anomalous situation where the authorities would be faced with a difficulty as to which order they are required to follow. The continuation of the proceedings before the learned NGT for the same cause of action which is seized with the High Court would not be in the interest of justice - Appeal disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge to NGT orders prohibiting further construction
2. Jurisdictional conflict between NGT and High Court
3. Violation of High Court order and contempt proceedings
4. Subordination of Tribunals to High Courts
5. Quashing of NGT proceedings and referral to High Court
6. Balancing development and environmental concerns

Analysis:

Issue 1: Challenge to NGT orders prohibiting further construction
The Appellant challenged the NGT's orders dated 6th May 2022 and 20th May 2022, which prohibited further construction at a resort near Visakhapatnam. The Appellant argued that the construction was in compliance with permissions and that the NGT's actions were unwarranted.

Issue 2: Jurisdictional conflict between NGT and High Court
The High Court had issued an interim order allowing construction activities subject to environmental regulations. However, the NGT initiated proceedings based on a letter from the Respondent, leading to conflicting orders. The Appellant contended that the NGT should not have proceeded when the High Court was already seized of the matter.

Issue 3: Violation of High Court order and contempt proceedings
The Respondent alleged that the construction violated the High Court's order, leading to contempt proceedings. The High Court had issued notice in response to the alleged violations, indicating a conflict between the High Court's directives and the NGT's actions.

Issue 4: Subordination of Tribunals to High Courts
The judgment emphasized that Tribunals are subordinate to High Courts concerning territorial jurisdiction. Citing legal precedents, the Court highlighted the importance of respecting orders from constitutional courts over those from statutory tribunals.

Issue 5: Quashing of NGT proceedings and referral to High Court
The Court quashed the NGT proceedings in O.A. No. 361 of 2021, directing the parties to approach the High Court for appropriate orders. It stressed the need for the High Court to address the conflicting orders and strike a balance between development and environmental concerns.

Issue 6: Balancing development and environmental concerns
While acknowledging the importance of development for economic progress, the judgment underscored the equal significance of environmental preservation for future generations. The Court directed construction to proceed only in specified areas until the High Court's decision, emphasizing the need to safeguard the environment.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court quashed the NGT proceedings, referred the matter to the High Court, and emphasized the importance of balancing development with environmental protection. The judgment highlighted the subordination of Tribunals to High Courts and the need to comply with orders from constitutional courts.