Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Hikal Ltd., a chemical manufacturing company with a factory in Taloja, Maharashtra, challenged orders of the National Green Tribunal (NGT) dated 18 January 2022 and 23 September 2022. The NGT had taken suo motu cognizance of a newspaper report about a gas leak in Surat's industrial area that caused six deaths and sickened twenty persons. The NGT constituted a Joint Committee to investigate and, based on its report, directed the closure of the petitioner's unit and imposed liability for environmental compensation. The petitioner contended that it was not heard before these directions were issued, violating principles of natural justice. The High Court examined the NGT's suo motu powers under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, and held that while the Tribunal can take cognizance on its own, it must follow the procedure of notice and hearing before passing adverse orders. The Court found that the petitioner was not given an opportunity to respond to the Joint Committee's report, and the NGT's directions were disproportionate and without proper application of mind. The High Court quashed the impugned orders and remanded the matter to the NGT for fresh consideration after affording a hearing to the petitioner. The Court emphasized that environmental protection must be balanced with principles of natural justice and that the polluter pays principle can only be applied after a fair determination of liability.
Headnote
A) Environmental Law - Natural Justice - Right to Hearing - National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, Sections 14, 15, 19 - The NGT took suo motu cognizance of a newspaper report regarding a gas leak and constituted a Joint Committee. Without providing the petitioner an opportunity to respond to the Committee's report, the Tribunal directed closure of the petitioner's unit and imposed liability. The High Court held that such directions violated principles of natural justice as the petitioner was not heard before the adverse order was passed (Paras 1-10, 20-25). B) Environmental Law - Jurisdiction of NGT - Scope of Suo Motu Powers - National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, Sections 14, 15 - The NGT has jurisdiction to take suo motu cognizance of environmental issues, but it must follow the procedure under the Act and rules. The Tribunal cannot bypass the requirement of notice and hearing, especially when the directions have civil consequences. The High Court clarified that the NGT's suo motu powers do not dispense with the need to hear the person likely to be affected (Paras 15-18, 26-30). C) Environmental Law - Liability for Environmental Damage - Polluter Pays Principle - Environment Protection Act, 1986, Section 5; Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, Sections 24, 25 - While the polluter pays principle is a recognized environmental law principle, its application must be preceded by a proper determination of liability after hearing the concerned party. The High Court set aside the NGT's directions as they were passed without such determination and without considering the petitioner's explanation (Paras 31-35).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the National Green Tribunal could pass directions imposing liability and directing closure of a unit without affording an opportunity of hearing to the affected party, and whether the directions were within its jurisdiction under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the NGT orders dated 18 January 2022 and 23 September 2022, and remanded the matter to the NGT for fresh consideration after affording a hearing to the petitioner. The Court directed the NGT to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law, after giving the petitioner an opportunity to be heard.
Law Points
- Natural Justice
- Jurisdiction of National Green Tribunal
- Suo Motu Cognizance
- Environmental Liability
- Pre-decisional Hearing
- Proportionality of Directions
