Case Note & Summary
These civil appeals, filed under Section 22 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, challenge two orders dated 15.02.2022 and 16.09.2022 passed by the National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in Original Application No. 71/2021. The appellant, a public limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, operates a sugar manufacturing unit at village Sheikhpura, Khatauli, Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh. In March 2021, respondent No.2 filed a complaint before the NGT alleging that the sugar mill was discharging untreated waste into a drain, contaminating groundwater over an area of about one and a half kilometres and depth up to 50 metres. NGT constituted a joint committee of CPCB, UPPCB and the District Magistrate, Muzaffarnagar on 22.03.2021 to inspect and report. After initial delays due to closure of the mill and covid pandemic, the joint committee inspected the unit on 08.12.2021 and submitted a report dated 11.01.2022. NGT found that the appellant had violated environmental norms, including illegal disposal of untreated effluent, dilution at outlet with fresh water to conceal real status, absence of flow meters, absence of records of oil and grease and absence of ETP logbook. NGT directed the joint committee to assess compensation for past violations. The supplementary report dated 10.08.2022 calculated compensation of Rs 34,20,000 for 114 days of violation at Rs 30,000 per day, which worked out to Rs 18 crores at 2 percent of annual turnover of Rs 900 crores. NGT accepted this and directed the appellant to deposit Rs 18 crores with the District Magistrate, Muzaffarnagar within one month for restoration of environment. Aggrieved, the appellant filed appeals. The Supreme Court by order dated 02.11.2022 condoned delay, issued notice, and stayed the compensation orders. In the appeals, the appellant argued that impugned orders were non est due to violation of principles of natural justice, as the appellant was not made party to NGT proceedings and was not heard. Appellant also challenged the scientific methodology and findings of the joint committee and contended that NGT ignored procedures under Sections 21 and 22 of the Water Act, 1974 and Section 19(1) of the NGT Act. Respondents supported the NGT orders, arguing that untreated effluent discharge contaminated groundwater affecting 10-15 thousand people, joint committee reports were scientific and accepted as expert views, and principles of natural justice need not be applied as straitjacket; appellant had copies of reports but did not contest. The Supreme Court then considered relevant statutory provisions, including definitions under the Water Act. The final decision of the Supreme Court is not available in the extracted portion; the available text ends with reference to statutory definitions.
Headnote
A) Environmental Law - Pollution Control - Discharge of Untreated Effluent - Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 Sections 21 and 22; National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 Section 22 - NGT found that sugar mill violated environmental norms by illegal disposal of untreated effluent, dilution at outlet, absence of flow meter and records. NGT directed joint committee to assess past violations and later imposed Rs 18 crore compensation at 2% of annual turnover. (Paras 2, 2.1, 4.7, 4.8) B) Administrative Law - Natural Justice - Audi Alteram Partem - National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 Section 19(1) - Appellant argued NGT passed adverse orders without making appellant a party or granting hearing, violating principles of natural justice and rendering orders non est. NGT had directed copies of reports to appellant but no formal opportunity to contest. (Paras 6-6.4, 7.2) C) Environmental Law - Expert Committee Reports - Scientific Methodology - Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 Sections 21 and 22 - Joint committee inspected on 08.12.2021 and submitted reports; appellant contended reports were scientifically impossible and contradicted by inspection data. Respondents argued expert committee findings were rightly accepted by NGT. (Paras 4.6-4.7, 6.2-6.3, 7.1) D) Environmental Law - Compensation - Computation Based on Turnover - National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 Section 22; Water Act, 1974 Sections 21, 22 - NGT accepted joint committee supplementary report computing compensation of Rs 18 crores at 2% of annual turnover of Rs 900 crores for 114 days of violation and directed deposit for restoration. Supreme Court's appeal challenged this order on natural justice and scientific grounds. (Paras 2.1, 4.8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether impugned NGT orders dated 15.02.2022 and 16.09.2022 are vitiated by violation of natural justice; whether joint committee reports are scientifically valid; whether compensation of Rs 18 crores is justifiable; whether procedures under Water Act, 1974 were followed
Law Points
- Principles of natural justice
- audi alteram partem
- Section 19(1) National Green Tribunal Act 2010
- Section 22 National Green Tribunal Act 2010
- Sections 21 and 22 Water Act 1974
- environmental compensation
- joint committee inspection
- NGT powers
