Jeet Singh Kanwar & Another v. Union Of India Through The Secretary Ministry Of Environment & Forests

Jeet Singh Kanwar & Another v. Union Of India Through The Secretary Ministry Of Environment & Forests

(National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench)

Miscellaneous Application No. 45 Of 2012 Arising Out Of Appeal No. 10 Of 2011(T) (Neaa Appeal No. 11 Of 2010) | 22-03-2012

Order dated January 18, 2010 passed by the Ministry of Environment & Forests granting Environmental Clearance to 3x350 MW Coal Based Thermal Power Plant at village Dhanras, in Khatgora Tehsil, in Korba Distt., in Chhattisgarh is assailed in this Appeal, invoking jurisdiction under Section 11 (1) of the National Environment Appellate Authority Act, 1997.

2. After promulgation of National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 the said Appeal stood transferred to this Tribunal. It appears that Notices were issued to all the Respondents and they have filed detailed Reply(s) both on facts and law.

3. In course of hearing, however, it appears that the Appeal was presented beyond the time prescribed under the Act. Being conscious about the said fact, Appellants have filed an Application for Condonation of Delay. Respondent 3 the Project Proponent has also filed an affidavit, repudiating the stand taken in the Application for Condonation of Delay.

4. According to Mr. Dutta, the Appellants are the residents of remote villages of Chhattisgarh and that they were not aware of the Impugned Order. It is further submitted that the said order was not put on the website of the Ministry, though law mandatorily requires to do so. In the Counter Affidavit filed by the Ministry, the date on which the order was uploaded in the website is not mentioned which raises a cloud of suspicion in our mind with regard to the date.

5. In the Reply filed by Respondent 3, a stand has been taken that prompt steps were taken by the said Respondent to get the order published in different newspapers. But perusal of the newspaper cuttings, copies of which are annexed to the Reply it appears that the entire order was not published in any newspaper.

6. Learned Counsel for Respondent 3 further submits that a copy of the order was handed over to the local Gram Panchayat to display the same on the Notice Board. Unfortunately, no documents is produced before us to satisfy that, in fact, the entire order was published or exhibited on the Notice Board of the local Gram Panchayat.

7. That apart, as it appears, there is a delay of only 88 days in filing the Appeal. After going through the averments made in the Application of Condonation of Delay and the fact that protection of environment is more important than prohibiting a person to approach this Tribunal on technical objections (see AIR 1979 SC. 1144 [LQ/SC/1979/1] ) and the fact that Appellants belong to the remote villages of Chhattisgarh, we feel ends of justice and equity will be better served if the delay is condoned. We are also satisfied that the reasons assigned are sufficient to condone the delay. Accordingly, the Application for Condonation of Delay, is allowed, and the delay is condoned.

8. It appears pleadings on merit are also complete. List the Appeal on April 12, 2012 for hearing. It is made clear that no further adjournment shall be granted to any party.

Advocate List
Bench
  • MR. A.S NAIDU, ACTING CHAIRPERSON
  • PROF. DR. R. NAGENDRAN, EXPERT MEMBER
Eq Citations
  • LQ/NGT/2012/28
Head Note

A. Environment Protection — Appeal — Delay in filing Appeal — Condonation of — Appellants being residents of remote villages of Chhattisgarh and not being aware of impugned order — Order not put on website of Ministry though law mandatorily requires to do so — Date on which order was uploaded in website not mentioned in Counter Affidavit filed by Ministry — Entire order not published in any newspaper — No documents produced before Tribunal to satisfy that, in fact, entire order was published or exhibited on Notice Board of local Gram Panchayat — Delay of only 88 days in filing Appeal — Protection of environment is more important than prohibiting a person to approach Tribunal on technical objections — Appellants belong to remote villages of Chhattisgarh — Reasons assigned are sufficient to condone delay — Delay condoned — B. Environment Protection — In general — National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 — S. 16 — Condonation of delay — Delay of only 88 days in filing Appeal — Protection of environment is more important than prohibiting a person to approach Tribunal on technical objections — Appellants belong to remote villages of Chhattisgarh — Reasons assigned are sufficient to condone delay — Delay condoned — Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 — S. 20-B — Appeal against order of Central Government granting environmental clearance — Appeal to National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 — S. 11