2023 (7) TMI 534 - SC - Indian Laws

Applicability of principles of natural justice on the proceedings of the NGT - alleged violators were not given an opportunity to object to the report with regard to alleged violations - no consideration by the NGT of the pros and cons vis-a-vis the recommendations made by the expert Committee and as to whether the directions issued were appropriate to the case of each of the appellant(s) herein or not. - Issue related to storing, handling, management and utilization of fly ash and consequential continuing damage to the environment and public health HELD THAT - The NGT has simply accepted the recommendations as remedial action suggested by the Committee but the same is in the absence of there being objections filed by the appellants herein who were the respondents before the NGT and without giving any hearing to them and against whom directions impugned in these cases have been passed by the NGT. The procedure adopted by the NGT is an instance of violation of the principles of natural justice. At this stage, it was also observe dthat the recommendations made by an expert Committee are not binding on the NGT, they are only by way of assistance to enable the NGT to arrive at a correct decision in the matter. It is first important to differentiate expert committees which are set by the courts/tribunals from those set up by the Government in exercise of executive powers or under a particular statute. The latter are set up due to their technical expertise in a given area, and their reports are, subject to judicially observed restraints, open to judicial review before courts when decisions are taken solely based upon them. The precedents of this court unanimously note that courts should be circumspect in rejecting the opinion of these committees, unless they find their decision to be manifestly arbitrary or mala fide - The role of an expert committee appointed by an adjudicatory forum is only to assist it in the exercise of adjudicatory functions by providing them better data and factual clarity, which is also open to challenge by all concerned parties. Allowing for objections to be raised and considered makes the process fair and participatory for all stakeholders. The NGT is a judicial body and therefore exercises adjudicatory function. The very nature of an adjudicatory function would carry with it the requirement that principles of natural justice are complied with, particularly when there is an adversarial system of hearing of the cases before the Tribunal or for that matter before the Courts in India. The NGT though is a special adjudicatory body constituted by an Act of Parliament, nevertheless, the discharge of its function must be in accordance with law which would also include compliance with the principles of natural justice as envisaged in Section 19(1) of the Act. It is apparent that the appellant(s) herein who were respondents before the NGT were not given an opportunity to file their objections to the recommendations made by the Committee constituted by the NGT which is apparent by the fact that the recommendations were uploaded on 15.01.2022 and the final order of the NGT was passed three days later on, i.e. 18.01.2022. Thus, this is a clear case of there being non compliance with the principles of natural justice. On the said ground alone the impugned order is set aside, the matter is remanded to the NGT for re-consideration from the stage of the recommendations filed by the expert Committee constituted by the NGT. Appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Compliance with Principles of Natural Justice.
2. Remedial Measures for Environmental Damage.
3. Accountability for Past Violations.
4. Compensation for Victims.
5. Breach of Rihand Reservoir.

Summary:

1. Compliance with Principles of Natural Justice:
The appellants argued that the National Green Tribunal (NGT) violated the principles of natural justice by not providing them adequate time to object to the expert Committee's report. The report was uploaded on the NGT's website on 15.01.2022, and the impugned directions were issued on 18.01.2022. The Supreme Court noted that the NGT should have given the appellants an opportunity to file their objections and be heard, as per Section 19(1) of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. The Court emphasized that the NGT's reliance on the expert Committee's recommendations without giving the appellants a chance to respond was improper and a clear violation of natural justice principles.

2. Remedial Measures for Environmental Damage:
The NGT directed the constitution of a fly ash management and utilization Mission to address issues related to the handling and disposal of fly ash. The Mission would be jointly headed by the Secretaries of MoEF&CC, Coal and Power, GoI, and the Chief Secretaries of UP and MP. The Mission would coordinate and monitor the implementation of recommendations, including the installation of air pollution control devices, scientific designing of fly ash dykes, and restoration of deteriorated environments. Quarterly progress would be reported on the MoEF&CC website.

3. Accountability for Past Violations:
The NGT held that Project Proponents (PPs) were liable for past violations. A Joint Committee of CPCB, State PCB, and jurisdictional District Magistrates would determine compensation based on principles laid down in previous judgments. The PPs were required to take remedial measures as per the Committee's recommendations, failing which coercive measures would be taken by the concerned authorities.

4. Compensation for Victims:
For the incident dated 10.04.2020, the NGT increased the compensation for the heirs of the deceased from Rs. 10 lakhs to Rs. 15 lakhs. The order allowed the heirs to claim higher compensation by approaching the appropriate forum. The NGT also directed compliance with minimum wage laws for persons appointed as compensation to the victims, to be overseen by the Labour Departments of UP and MP.

5. Breach of Rihand Reservoir:
The NGT directed further remedial measures for the breach of the Rihand Reservoir in line with the Committee's recommendations. All related matters and applications were disposed of, with aggrieved parties free to seek remedies as per law.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court set aside the NGT's order and remanded the matter for reconsideration, emphasizing the need for compliance with the principles of natural justice. The appellants were permitted to file their objections to the expert Committee's recommendations, and the NGT was directed to dispose of the applications after considering these objections and providing a reasonable opportunity for all parties to be heard. The appeals were allowed and disposed of accordingly.