NGT can't outsource its work to Joint Committees: Supreme Court

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) cannot simply outsource its opinions to expert committees or base decisions only on the findings reached by such committees, the Supreme Court recently reiterated [Grasim Industries Limited v. State of Madhya Pradesh]..A Bench of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan made the observation while criticising a Bench of the NGT for the manner in which it passed an order penalising an industrial unit (appellant) in Madhya Pradesh.The Court found that the NGT had condemned the appellant without hearing it, based only on the findings of a joint committee which too did not hear the appellant."The procedure followed by the learned NGT was totally unknown to the settled principles of natural justice ... The NGT is a tribunal constituted under the National Green Tribunal Act of 2010. A tribunal is required to arrive at its decision by fully considering the facts and circumstances of the case before it. It cannot outsource an opinion and base its decision on such an opinion," the Court held.In this regard, the Court also referred to the top court's 2022 decision in Kantha Vibhag Yuva Koli Samaj Parivartan Trust and Others v. State of Gujarat and Others wherein it was held that adjudicatory functions of the NGT cannot be delegated to expert committees..The approach adopted by the NGT clearly smacks of condemning a person unheard.Supreme Court.The proceedings before the NGT in this case were initiated based on a letter sent to the tribunal. The tribunal, in response, ordered the State Pollution Control Board to inspect the appellant's industrial plant. The tribunal then constituted a Joint Committee, which concluded that the appellant had committed certain environmental violations. Based on this Joint Committee report, the NGT in 2021 imposed a penalty of ₹75 lakhs for each of the violations alleged against the appellant. The appellant challenged this before the Supreme Court, where it denied the allegations of environmental violations. .Pertinently, the appellant also informed that it was neither made a party before the NGT or the committee, nor was it given any opportunity of hearing before it was penalised. The top court criticised the approach of the NGT, observing that the tribunal could not have proceeded with the matter without first impleading the appellant as a party."As a matter of fact, the NGT could not have proceeded further with the matter even at the initial stage without impleading the appellant herein as a party respondent. The approach adopted by the NGT clearly smacks of condemning a person unheard," the Court said..The Court proceeded to set aside the NGT's 2021 order and sent the matter back to it for fresh consideration."Needless to state that if the NGT decides to proceed further on the basis of the complaint of Respondent No.1, it shall not do so unless the appellant herein is impleaded as a party respondent," the Court added. .Supreme Court pulls up NGT (again) for relying on expert committee report without giving party opportunity to object.Senior Advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul appeared for the appellant, Grasim Industries Limited.Advocate Raghav Sharma appeared for the State of Madhya Pradesh.Advocate Rahul Pratap appeared for the original complainant..[Read Judgment]