Immaterial Whether Appellate Authority Under Air Or Water Act Has Expert Member After Formation Of NGT: Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that the absence of an Expert Member as part of the Appellate Authority under the Haryana Air and Water Act does not occasion any disadvantage to the person aggrieved approaching the Authority after the National Green Tribunal (NGT) has come into force.

The Court dismissed the plea challenging the notification issued by the Haryana Government amending the Haryana (Prevention and Control of Water Pollution) Rules, 1978 (Water Act) and the Haryana Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules, 1983 (Air Act), providing a single-member Appellate Authority.

The notification was challenged on the ground that it is in direct conflict with law laid down by Apex Court in its judgment in 1999 in A.P. Pollution Control Board Versus Prof. M.V. Nayudu, wherein it was held that Appellate Authorities in matters relating to environmental laws ought to be manned by technical personnel in addition to judicial members.

Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice H.S. Grewal noted that from a bare perusal of decision in A.P. Pollution Control Board's case, "it is obvious that the law that was laid down by Apex Court mandating Appellate Authority to be a multi member body, including a technical expert as a member was laid down in the era when NGT Act had not been promulgated."

The Court added that the NGT Act not only bestows the Tribunal with original jurisdiction under Sections 14 and 15, but also appellate jurisdiction under Section 16.

Conferring with view of the State, the Court said that once a statutory Tribunal, namely National Green Tribunal, has been constituted and has started functioning, which inter alia comprises of experts in the field of environment as Expert Members, "the pressing need for the Appellate Authority under Air Act and Water Act to be comprised inter alia of a member in the field of environment gets obviated."

Counsel appearing for the State Ad AG Deepak Balyan submitted that the Tribunal has a team of ten to twenty technical members, who can very well cover up the lacuna, if any, in the composition of the Appellate Authority.

The State has also pointed out that as on 20.11.2023, the number of pending appeals before the Appellate Authority under the Air Act and the Water Act was three.

In this background, the State contended that to avoid excessive financial burden on the State exchequer, no useful purpose shall be served, after the constitution of the Tribunal, to have a three-member Appellate Authority under the Air Act and the Water Act, instead of only a single-member Appellate Authority.

Referring to Section 14 of the NGT Act, the Court said that the Tribunal is vested with the power to entertain all civil disputes involving a substantial question relating to the environment and such question arising out of the implementation of the enactments specified in Schedule I.

The bench pointed out that the Tribunal empowers it to entertain disputes relating to environmental issues as well, without approaching the Appellate Authority.

"The Tribunal may relegate the person approaching it directly to approach the Appellate Authority, but there is no bar under the NGT Act for the Tribunal to entertain a dispute relating to environment, especially arising out of Air Act and Water Act, directly without first insisting the aggrieved person to approach the Appellate Authority," it added.

It highlighted further that there is no such bar in the NGT Act and, therefore, the Tribunal can very well entertain and adjudicate disputes relating to environmental issues, especially arising out of the implementation of enactments of, inter alia, the Air Act and the Water Act.

Consequenty, the Court opined that providing for a single member Appellate Authority under Air Act and Water Act, vide notifications dated 20.11.2019, does not violate the law laid down by Apex Court in A.P. Pollution Control Board's case, especially when viewed from the context of existing laws relating to environment prevailing at the time when Apex Court pronounced decision in A.P. Pollution Control Board's case.

Mr. Jitender Dhanda, Advocate, and Ms. Suman Sagar, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Deepak Balyan, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana.

Title: Sunil v. State of Haryana and others

Click here to read/download the order