NGT vested with suo motu power in discharge of functions: Supreme Court

New Delhi: The National Green Tribunal (NGT) is vested with suo motu power, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday and said it is vital for the well-being of the nation and its people to have a flexible mechanism to address issues related to environmental damage so that a better legacy can be left for the future generations.

The NGT can hardly afford to remain a mute spectator when no-one knocks on its door and the hands-off mode for the tribunal, when faced with exigencies requiring an immediate and effective response, would debilitate the forum from discharging its responsibility, the Apex Court said.

A Bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar said it must adopt an interpretation that sustains the spirit of public good and not render the environmental watchdog of the country toothless and ineffective.

It is accordingly declared that the NGT is vested with suo motu (on its own) power in the discharge of its functions under the NGT Act, the Bench, also comprising Justices Hrishikesh Roy and C T Ravikumar, said in its 77-page judgment.

The top court delivered the verdict while considering the question of whether the NGT has the power to exercise suo motu jurisdiction in discharge of its functions under the National Green Tribunal Act 2010. The question arose while dealing with a batch of petitions.

In the circumstance where the adverse environmental impact may be egregious but the community affected is unable to effectively get the machinery into action, a forum created specifically to address such concerns should surely be expected to move with expediency and of its own accord, it said.

While noting that NGT has been recognised as one of the most progressive tribunals in the world, the top court said the nature of ecological imbalance which is visible even in our own times may cascade and the unforeseen injustice of the future may not be capable of being handled within the frontiers set forth today.

The NGT, with the distinct role envisaged for it, can hardly afford to remain a mute spectator when no-one knocks on its door, it said, adding, The hands-off mode for the NGT, when faced with exigencies requiring an immediate and effective response, would debilitate the forum from discharging its responsibility and this must be ruled out in the interest of justice.

The judgment, which started with the dialogues of the two protagonists in 'Waiting for Godot', said the NGT must act, if the exigencies so demand, without indefinitely waiting for the "metaphorical Godot" to knock on its portal.

It is vital for the wellbeing of the nation and its people, to have a flexible mechanism to address all issues pertaining to environmental damage and resultant climate change so that we can leave behind a better environmental legacy, for our children, and the generations thereafter, it said.

The Bench said the statement of objects and reasons of the NGT Act also refers to the right to a healthy environment being a part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

It said an institution concerned with a significant aspect of the right to life necessarily should be given the most liberal construction.

The Bench also said activities of the NGT are not only geared towards the protection of the environment but also to ensure that developments do not cause serious and irreparable damage to the ecology and environment.

It said that access to justice may, however, be curtailed by illiteracy, lack of mobility, poverty or even lack of technical knowledge on the part of citizens and another deterrence is the likelihood of polluters or violators being powerful entities with adequate wherewithal to skirt regulations.

Thus, it may not always be feasible for individuals to knock on the doors of the tribunal, and NGT in such exigencies must not be made dysfunctional, it said.

The Bench further added it would be procedural hair-splitting to argue that the NGT could act upon a letter being written to it but learning about an environmental exigency, through any other means, cannot trigger the NGT tribunal into action.

To endorse such an approach would surely be rendering the forum procedurally shackled or incapacitated, it said, adding: "It must also be said that the exercise of suo motu jurisdiction does not mean eschewing with the principles of natural justice and fair play."

The Apex Court said the party, likely to be affected, should be afforded due opportunity to present their side before suffering adverse orders.