Summary
The Court set aside the NGT’s Sterlite orders for want of jurisdiction, without deciding the pollution or closure merits. The statutory first-appeal route could not be bypassed; composite Water Act and Air Act directions and the State Government’s Section 18 order were not directly appealable as entertained by the NGT. The original challenged orders remained operative. Sterlite could challenge them in the High Court, seek interim relief and request expeditious hearing.
Issues
- Whether the NGT could hear direct appeals bypassing the statutory appellate authority.
- Whether composite closure directions and a State Government direction under Section 18 of the Water Act were appealable to the NGT.
- Whether original jurisdiction or general judicial-review powers could cure the lack of appellate jurisdiction.
Provisions considered
- Sections 28 and 33B(a), Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974Required a first appellate order before the NGT could hear the consent-refusal appeal. (¶¶ 15, 21, 22, 23, 31, 34)
- Sections 31 and 31B, Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981Required the prescribed first appeal rather than a direct appeal to the NGT. (¶¶ 16, 21, 31, 34, 44)
- Sections 33A and 33B(c), Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974Contrasted the express appeal against Water Act directions with the absence of a corresponding appeal for Air Act directions in the applicable scheme. (¶¶ 15, 35)
- Section 31A, Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981Held that directions under this provision were not appealable to the NGT under the statutory scheme and could not be severed from the composite closure orders. (¶¶ 16, 35)
- Sections 18(1)(b) and 29, Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974The State’s direction was not appealable to the NGT and could not be recharacterised as a quasi-judicial revisional order. (¶¶ 15, 39, 42, 43)
- Sections 14, 16, 29 and 33, National Green Tribunal Act, 2010Confined appellate jurisdiction to the statutory grant; original environmental jurisdiction and overriding effect did not supply general High Court-like judicial review. (¶¶ 17, 31, 34, 35, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44)
Held
- Appeal is a statutory substantive right and the tribunal must remain within the statutory grant. The consent-refusal appeals were still pending before the first appellate authority when the NGT entertained a direct challenge to the original order; adjournment did not make that direct appeal competent. (¶¶ 21, 22, 23, 31, 34, 38)
- The applicable legislation expressly permitted appeals against Section 33A Water Act directions but not Section 31A Air Act directions. The composite orders could not be split or treated as predominantly Water Act orders to confer jurisdiction; original jurisdiction under Section 14 could not substitute for an unavailable appeal. (¶ 35)
- The State Government’s Section 18 direction required challenge before a competent civil or writ court; alleged invalidity did not permit simply ignoring it. It was not an appealable Section 29 revisional determination. (¶ 39)
- The NGT lacked general judicial-review powers equivalent to Article 226. Its specialist character and the statutory bar of civil jurisdiction did not confer authority beyond the governing legislation. (¶¶ 40, 41, 42, 43)
- Non-constitution or defective constitution of the first appellate authority could not create a direct NGT appeal by necessity. (¶ 44)
- The NGT judgments were set aside solely on maintainability. The consequential TNPCB order of 22 January 2019 was also set aside, leaving the earlier original orders alive. Sterlite could seek High Court review, interim relief and expedited hearing; the writ challenge was to be considered on merits notwithstanding the alternative remedy concerning the 9 April 2018 order. (¶¶ 11, 45)
Result
Appeals disposed of setting aside the NGT judgments and consequential TNPCB order of 22 January 2019. Earlier challenged orders remain operative, with liberty for High Court proceedings and no decision on the environmental merits.