Summary
A transferred public-interest petition challenged both a 2008 environmental clearance and a later change of land use from green belt to industrial purpose. The Court confirmed that the clearance challenge was time-barred. It remitted the separate land-use challenge to the NGT to consider sufficient cause within Section 14(3)’s extended limitation period, using the original High Court filing as the relevant institution. Neither condonation nor the merits or other objections were finally decided.
Issues
- Whether the challenge to the 2008 environmental clearance survived limitation.
- Whether the separate land-use challenge could be considered under the NGT’s original jurisdiction after transfer from the High Court.
- Who should decide sufficient cause and the remaining issues.
Provisions considered
- Section 14(3) and proviso, National Green Tribunal Act, 2010The land-use challenge was remitted for the NGT to consider whether sufficient cause justified entertaining it within the six-month period and permissible further sixty days, with regard to the original High Court institution date. (¶¶ 10, 17, 19-20)
Held
- The environmental clearance preceded commencement of the NGT Act, and no challenge under the earlier appellate enactment was pending for transfer. The belated clearance challenge was barred, a position accepted by appellant’s counsel. (¶¶ 12-14, 20(i))
- The original writ petition separately challenged the later land-use notification. Its numbering as an appeal after transfer did not dispose of the argument that alleged violation of clearance conditions could support recourse to original jurisdiction under Section 14. (¶ 15-19)
- The High Court petition was instituted on 8 September 2011 following publication of the land-use notification on 18 February 2011. It fell within the potentially condonable extended period if the NGT found sufficient cause; the subsequent period spent before the High Court preceded transfer. (¶ 17)
- Condonation remained entirely for the NGT. The Court remitted that issue and expressed no opinion on rival merits; if delay was condoned, all issues and contentions remained available for determination. (¶ 19-20)
- The appeal was partly allowed without costs, while the clearance challenge remained finally barred. (¶ 20-22)
Result
Appeal partly allowed without costs. The environmental-clearance challenge remained time-barred. The land-use challenge was remitted for the NGT to decide condonation within Section 14(3)’s permissible extended period and, if condoned, all remaining issues without prejudice.