WHETHER NGT HAS THE JURISDICTION TO TAKE SUO MOTO CASES? - SC

The Top court recently concluded hearing oral submission by a batch of petitions on the issue of whether the National Green Tribunal has the jurisdiction to initiate suo motu proceeding based on a news report or letter. 

The bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar, Hrishikesh Roy, and CT Ravikumar was hearing comprehensive arguments by senior counsels Sanjay Parikh and Gopal Sankaranarayanan stating, that "the NGT has the jurisdiction under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 to exercise suo moto cases affecting people at large even in the absence of a formal complaint".

Senior counsel Sanjay Parikh argued that NGT differs from other tribunals as it has to uphold national statutory commitments and international commitments such as the Stockholm convention. NGT has been assigned to protect the rights given under Article 21 of the constitution, and such protection forms a part of customary international law.

"Whether it can go unremedied?". Senior counsel further placed reliance on SP Gupta vs Union of India to contend that it is the duty of environmental courts to take cognizance of cases involving environmental matters harming the public at large. But the tribunal should not rely on news reports unless authenticated. 

He further placed reliance on section 15(1) of the Act, which states that NGt has the power to grant relief, restitution, and compensation. However, no provision makes the filing of an application necessary. 

The Bench Counsel Parekh "What happens when an Act of God takes place"? Parekh replied while referring to Alaknanda Hydro Power Company v. Anuj Joshi replied, The Apex Court took cognizance of the 2013 Kedarnath tragedy and passed various directions to hydroelectric projects to prevent such incidents in the future. The power should be vested with the NGT to secure 'restitution of environment' pursuant to government inaction.

Author: Papiha Ghoshal