NGT vs High Court: Statutory Tribunal and Constitutional Court in Environmental Matters

Environmental cases in India can reach both the National Green Tribunal and the High Courts. The NGT is a specialised statutory tribunal with judicial and expert members, created by the NGT Act, 2010. A High Court is a constitutional court with writ jurisdiction under Article 226 and supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227. Their jurisdictions overlap but are not identical, and the Supreme Court has worked out principles for their coexistence.

1. The National Green Tribunal

The NGT was established on 18 October 2010 under Section 3 of the NGT Act, with its Principal Bench in Delhi and zonal benches at Bhopal, Pune, Kolkata and Chennai. It consists of a Chairperson (a Supreme Court Judge or High Court Chief Justice), judicial members (High Court Judges) and expert members (scientists or administrators with environmental experience). Its jurisdiction is statutory: original jurisdiction over civil cases raising a substantial question relating to environment under the seven Schedule I Acts (Section 14); relief, compensation and restitution (Section 15); appeals against regulatory orders (Section 16); and no-fault liability (Section 17). It is not bound by the CPC, applies sustainable development, precaution and polluter pays (Section 20), may act suo motu (Ankita Sinha, 2021), and appeals lie directly to the Supreme Court (Section 22).

2. The High Court in Environmental Matters

A High Court under Article 226 may issue writs for enforcement of fundamental rights and for any other purpose, against any person or authority, including in PIL. It exercises superintendence over all courts and tribunals in its territory under Article 227. In environmental matters, High Courts have protected mangroves (Bombay HC, 2018), lakes (Karnataka and Madras HCs), and forests, ordered closure of polluting units, enforced noise rules, and even declared rivers legal persons (Uttarakhand HC, 2017). They can examine the constitutional validity of statutes and subordinate legislation, and their jurisdiction extends to all laws, including those outside Schedule I (such as the Wild Life (Protection) Act and the Forest Rights Act).

3. Coexistence: The Legal Position

• Writ jurisdiction cannot be ousted: in L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India, (1997) 3 SCC 261, a seven-judge bench held that the power of judicial review of High Courts under Articles 226 and 227 is part of the basic structure, and tribunals function as courts of first instance subject to it.
• Preference for the NGT: in Bhopal Gas Peedith Mahila Udyog Sangathan v. Union of India, (2012) 8 SCC 326, the Supreme Court directed that environmental cases covered by the NGT Act should ordinarily be dealt with by the NGT, and that High Courts may transfer such cases to it.
• Appeal route: an appeal against an NGT order lies to the Supreme Court under Section 22, not to the High Court; High Courts therefore do not sit in appeal over the NGT, though writs against NGT orders on limited grounds (lack of jurisdiction, violation of natural justice) have occasionally been entertained, and the Supreme Court has discouraged this.
• Vires questions: the NGT cannot strike down statutes; whether it can examine the validity of subordinate legislation has divided opinion, and High Courts have held such questions to be within their domain.
• Avoiding parallel proceedings: the Supreme Court has discouraged simultaneous proceedings on the same subject before both fora.

4. Related Topics and Provisions