High Court of Bombay at Goa Dismisses Petition Challenging NGT Order on Environmental Clearance for Hotel Construction in CRZ Area — Petitioner Failed to Establish Substantial Question of Law. The court held that the NGT's finding that the construction fell within the No Development Zone under CRZ Notification 2011 was based on evidence and not perverse, and the environmental clearance was void ab initio for ignoring mandatory statutory restrictions.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: GOA
  • 84
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, M/s. Leading Hotels, a company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956, challenged the order of the National Green Tribunal (NGT), West Zone, Pune, dated 30/09/2015 in Application No. 32/2015/WZ. The NGT had revoked the environmental clearance granted to the petitioner for construction of a hotel resort at Tiracol, Goa, and directed restoration of the site to its original condition. The petitioner sought to quash the NGT order and restore the environmental clearance. The respondents included local residents, an environmental NGO (Goa Foundation), the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority, State Environmental Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA), State Expert Appraisal Committee (SEAC), Biodiversity Management Committee (BMC), and the State of Goa. The NGT had found that the construction was within 200 meters of the High Tide Line, falling in the No Development Zone under the CRZ Notification 2011, and that the environmental clearance was granted without considering this prohibition. The NGT also noted that the BMC had objected to the project. The High Court, exercising jurisdiction under Article 226, held that its scope of review was limited to errors of law apparent on record and that the NGT's findings of fact were based on evidence and not perverse. The court found no error in the NGT's conclusion that the environmental clearance was void ab initio for ignoring CRZ restrictions. The petition was dismissed, and the NGT order was upheld.

Headnote

A) Environmental Law - Judicial Review - Scope under Article 226 - Challenge to NGT order - The court examined whether the NGT's order suffered from any error of law apparent on record. Held that the High Court's jurisdiction under Article 226 is supervisory and not appellate, and findings of fact by the NGT based on evidence cannot be reappreciated unless perverse or based on no evidence (Paras 4-6).

B) Environmental Law - Coastal Regulation Zone - CRZ Notification 2011 - Construction in No Development Zone - The petitioner's hotel construction was within 200 meters of the High Tide Line, falling in the No Development Zone under CRZ Notification 2011. Held that such construction is prohibited without prior approval from the Ministry of Environment and Forests, and the NGT correctly found that the environmental clearance was granted without considering this prohibition (Paras 7-9).

C) Environmental Law - Environmental Clearance - Validity - Non-consideration of CRZ restrictions - The SEIAA granted environmental clearance without addressing the CRZ notification. Held that the clearance was void ab initio as it ignored mandatory statutory restrictions, and the NGT's order revoking the clearance and directing restoration was justified (Paras 10-12).

D) Environmental Law - Biodiversity Management Committee - Role under Biological Diversity Act 2002 - The BMC had objected to the project on grounds of biodiversity loss. Held that the BMC's views are relevant and the NGT rightly considered them in concluding that the project would have adverse environmental impact (Paras 13-14).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the National Green Tribunal's order dated 30/09/2015 upholding the revocation of environmental clearance and directing restoration of the site suffers from any error of law warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the NGT order dated 30/09/2015. The court found no error of law in the NGT's decision and held that the environmental clearance was void ab initio for ignoring CRZ restrictions. The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Judicial review under Article 226 is limited to errors of law apparent on record
  • not factual reappraisal
  • National Green Tribunal's findings on environmental impact are entitled to deference
  • CRZ notification 2011 prohibits construction in No Development Zone
  • Environmental Impact Assessment notification 2006 requires prior environmental clearance
  • Biodiversity Management Committee has statutory role under Biological Diversity Act 2002.
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2015 LawText (BOM) (12) 90

Writ Petition No.728 of 2015

2015-12-15

F. M. Reis, C. V. Bhadang

Mr. Shivan Dessai, Mr. Jitendra P. Supekar, Ms. Norma Alvares, Mr. A. N. S. Nadkarni, Mr. D. Lawande

M/s. Leading Hotels

Shri Anthony Mendes, Agnelgodinho, Juzegodinho, Goa Foundation, Ministry of Environment & Forests, Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority, Goa State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA), Goa State Expert Appraisal Committee (SEAC), Biodiversity Management Committee (BMC), State of Goa, National Green Tribunal (deleted)

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of the National Green Tribunal revoking environmental clearance for a hotel construction project.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought quashing of NGT order dated 30/09/2015 and restoration of environmental clearance.

Filing Reason

Petitioner challenged the NGT order which revoked the environmental clearance and directed restoration of the site, arguing that the order was erroneous and without jurisdiction.

Previous Decisions

The National Green Tribunal, West Zone, Pune, by order dated 30/09/2015 in Application No. 32/2015/WZ, revoked the environmental clearance granted to the petitioner and directed restoration of the site to its original condition.

Issues

Whether the NGT order suffers from any error of law apparent on record warranting interference under Article 226. Whether the environmental clearance was validly granted despite the construction falling within the No Development Zone under CRZ Notification 2011.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the NGT order was erroneous and without jurisdiction, and that the environmental clearance was validly granted. Respondents argued that the construction was within 200 meters of the High Tide Line, prohibited under CRZ Notification 2011, and the environmental clearance was void ab initio.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court's jurisdiction under Article 226 is supervisory and not appellate. The NGT's findings of fact, based on evidence, cannot be reappreciated unless perverse or based on no evidence. The environmental clearance was void ab initio as it was granted without considering the mandatory prohibition under CRZ Notification 2011, which prohibits construction within 200 meters of the High Tide Line in the No Development Zone.

Judgment Excerpts

The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has taken us through the impugned order and submitted that the NGT has erred in revoking the environmental clearance. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondent nos.1 to 4 has supported the impugned order and submitted that the construction is within 200 meters of the High Tide Line. We have considered the submissions and perused the record. The NGT has found that the construction falls within the No Development Zone under CRZ Notification 2011. We find no error of law in the impugned order. The petition is dismissed.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed Writ Petition No.728 of 2015 before the High Court of Bombay at Goa challenging the order of the National Green Tribunal, West Zone, Pune, dated 30/09/2015 in Application No. 32/2015/WZ. The NGT had revoked the environmental clearance granted to the petitioner for construction of a hotel resort at Tiracol, Goa, and directed restoration of the site. The High Court heard the matter and dismissed the petition on 15/12/2015.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226
  • Coastal Regulation Zone Notification, 2011:
  • Environmental Impact Assessment Notification, 2006:
  • Biological Diversity Act, 2002:
  • National Green Tribunal Act, 2010:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Landlord's Petition Challenging Revisional Order Under Maharashtra Private Forests (Acquisition) Act, 1975. Revisional Authority Cannot Reopen Final Acquisition of Land as Private Forest Under Section 18 of M.P.F. Act.
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Bombay at Goa Dismisses Petition Challenging NGT Order on Environmental Clearance for Hotel Construction in CRZ Area — Petitioner Failed to Establish Substantial Question of Law. The court held that the NGT's finding that the construc...