Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a challenge by Citizens for Green Doon, an environmental group, against Stage-I Forest Clearances and a Wildlife Clearance issued for a highway project on National Highway No 72A in Uttarakhand and Uttar Pradesh. Initially, the appellant filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution, but the Supreme Court, in an order dated 7 September 2021, directed them to approach the National Green Tribunal (NGT) for the forest clearance challenge while allowing the wildlife clearance challenge at a later stage. Accordingly, the appellant filed Original Application No 240 of 2021 under Section 14(1) of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. The NGT dismissed this application on 6 October 2021, reasoning that the appellant was circumventing its appellate jurisdiction under Section 16 by invoking original jurisdiction, and noted that Stage-I approval itself could be deemed working permission for tree cutting under a simplified procedure for linear projects. The core legal issue was whether the NGT correctly dismissed the original application, given that the challenge pertained to Stage-I Forest Clearances and no specific order under Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 had been issued. The appellant argued that Section 16(e) of the NGT Act provides an appeal only against orders or decisions under Section 2 of the FC Act, and since no such order existed—as evidenced by an RTI response indicating no permission for tree felling had been granted—the original jurisdiction under Section 14 was appropriate. They also highlighted a circular dated 28 August 2015 requiring such orders to be placed in the public domain, which was allegedly violated. The respondents, represented by the Attorney General, contended that all necessary clearances, including Stage-I, Stage-II, and a tree-felling permission dated 27 August 2021, had been obtained and publicized, and that the project included wildlife safety measures, thus should not be injuncted. The Supreme Court, in its analysis, examined the jurisdictional framework, noting that Section 16(e) and Section 2A of the FC Act both condition appellate remedy on an order or decision under Section 2. It found that Stage-I Clearance alone does not constitute such an order, as the circular specifies that a separate order by the State authority is required for tree cutting. The court observed discrepancies in the public disclosure of the tree-felling order, undermining transparency. Consequently, the court held that the NGT erred in dismissing the original application, as no appealable order existed, and directed the NGT to hear the matter on merits under its original jurisdiction. The decision emphasizes the procedural requirements for forest clearances and the importance of public access to environmental decisions.
Headnote
A) Environmental Law - Forest Clearance - Jurisdiction of National Green Tribunal - National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, Sections 14(1), 16(e) - Appellant challenged Stage-I Forest Clearances for a highway project via original application under Section 14(1) of the NGT Act, but the Tribunal dismissed it, holding that appellate jurisdiction under Section 16(e) should have been invoked - The Supreme Court analyzed that Section 16(e) applies only when an order or decision is made by the State Government or other authority under Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, and since Stage-I Clearance alone does not constitute such an order, the Tribunal's dismissal was erroneous - Held that the Tribunal must entertain the original application as no appealable order existed under Section 2 (Paras 8-9). B) Environmental Law - Tree Cutting Permissions - Public Domain Requirement - Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, Section 2 - Circular dated 28 August 2015 - The circular stipulates that for linear projects, an order for tree cutting by the competent State authority must be passed and placed in the public domain before any non-forest activity - In this case, an order dated 27 August 2021 was allegedly issued but not publicly disclosed, as evidenced by an RTI response denying its existence - The Court noted this discrepancy and emphasized that compliance with the circular's public domain mandate is essential for transparency and to enable aggrieved parties to seek remedies (Paras 5, 9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the National Green Tribunal erred in dismissing the Original Application under Section 14(1) of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 on the ground that the appellant should have invoked appellate jurisdiction under Section 16(e), when the challenge was to Stage-I Forest Clearances and no order under Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 had been passed?
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the NGT's order dated 6 October 2021, and directed the NGT to hear the Original Application No 240 of 2021 on merits under its original jurisdiction.
Law Points
- Appellate jurisdiction under Section 16(e) of the National Green Tribunal Act
- 2010 is triggered only upon an order or decision made by the State Government or other authority under Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act
- 1980
- Original jurisdiction under Section 14(1) of the National Green Tribunal Act
- 2010 can be invoked when no such order exists
- Circular dated 28 August 2015 mandates that an order for tree cutting by the competent State authority must be placed in the public domain before any non-forest activity
- Stage-I Forest Clearance alone does not constitute an order under Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act
- 1980 for appellate purposes
