NGT Original vs Appellate Jurisdiction: Sections 14 and 15 Compared with Section 16

The National Green Tribunal wears two hats. As a court of first instance, it hears environmental disputes and claims for compensation brought directly to it (original jurisdiction, Sections 14 and 15). As an appellate forum, it reviews decisions of regulators such as environmental clearances, forest approvals and orders of pollution control boards (appellate jurisdiction, Section 16). The two differ in who may invoke them, what they cover, time limits and the Tribunal's role. Both are exercised through applications or appeals under Section 18.

1. Original Jurisdiction: Sections 14 and 15

1.1 Section 14: settlement of disputes

Under Section 14(1), the Tribunal has jurisdiction over all civil cases where a substantial question relating to environment (including enforcement of any legal right relating to environment) is involved and arises out of the implementation of the Schedule I enactments (Water Act, Water Cess Act, forest conservation law, Air Act, EPA, PLI Act and Biological Diversity Act). A substantial question is defined in Section 2(1)(m): a direct violation of a specific statutory environmental obligation affecting the community at large, or causing substantial damage to environment or property, or broadly measurable damage to public health, or environmental consequences relating to a specific activity or point source. Under Section 14(3), an application must be filed within six months from the date the cause of action first arose, extendable by sixty days.

1.2 Section 15: relief, compensation and restitution

Under Section 15(1), the Tribunal may provide relief and compensation to victims of pollution and environmental damage (including accidents with hazardous substances), restitution of property damaged, and restitution of the environment. The relief is in addition to relief under the PLI Act (Section 15(2)). The application must be made within five years from the date the cause first arose, extendable by sixty days (Section 15(3)). Section 17 fixes liability on the person responsible, with no-fault liability for accidents (Section 17(3)). The Tribunal's suo motu power, upheld in Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Ankita Sinha (2021), is exercised in its original jurisdiction.

2. Appellate Jurisdiction: Section 16

Under Section 16, any person aggrieved may appeal to the Tribunal against specified orders, within thirty days of communication, extendable by sixty days:

• orders under Sections 28, 29 and 33A of the Water Act (appellate orders, revisional orders and directions) and Section 13 of the Water Cess Act;
• orders under Section 31 and directions under Section 31A of the Air Act;
• orders of the State Government or other authority under Section 2 of the forest conservation law (forest diversion);
• orders granting environmental clearance in areas where industries are prohibited or restricted, and orders refusing environmental clearance, under the EPA (read with Section 5A of the EPA); and
• determinations of benefit sharing and orders of the National Biodiversity Authority or State Biodiversity Board under the Biological Diversity Act.

After the Jan Vishwas and Water Amendment reforms, orders of adjudicating officers imposing penalties under the EPA, Air and Water Acts also lie in appeal to the NGT, within sixty days and on deposit of ten per cent of the penalty. The Tribunal has read 'person aggrieved' broadly, allowing local residents, NGOs and public-spirited persons to challenge environmental clearances. In Hanuman Laxman Aroskar v. Union of India, (2019) 15 SCC 401, the Supreme Court held that, as an expert appellate body, the NGT must examine the merits of the clearance and the adequacy of appraisal, not merely defer to the regulator.

3. Key Differences

4. Related Topics and Provisions