Supreme Court in a 2021 judgment described the National Green Tribunal (NGT) as not a mere adjudicatory body but a specialised protector tasked with fostering environmental justice & equity.
However, a major investigation done by The Indian Express recently has revealed deep-seated structural and functional issues within the NGT. These findings suggest that the tribunal, originally designed as a “specialized protector” of the environment, is undergoing a significant “pro-project” shift.
What is National Green Tribunal (NGT)?
- The National Green Tribunal (NGT) is a specialized judicial body in India established to handle cases related to environmental protection and the conservation of forests and other natural resources.
- It was established in 2010, under the National Green Tribunal Act, India became only the third country in the world (after Australia and New Zealand) to have a dedicated environmental tribunal.
- It is guided by the principles of sustainable development, the precautionary principle, and the polluter pays principle.
- The NGT has a Principal Bench in New Delhi and four zonal benches to ensure accessibility across India:
- Central Zonal Bench: Bhopal
- Eastern Zonal Bench: Kolkata
- Southern Zonal Bench: Chennai
- Western Zonal Bench: Pune
What is the composition of NGT?
| Qualification | Appointment | |
| Chairperson | Must be a retired Judge of the Supreme Court or a retired Chief Justice of a High Court. | Appointed by the Central Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of India. |
| Judicial Members | Must be a Judge of a High Court (or have been one), or qualified to be a Judge of a High Court. | Judicial and Expert members are appointed by a committee formed by the Central Government. |
| Expert Members | Must have professional qualifications and experience (minimum 15 years) in environmental science, forestry, biodiversity, climate change, or related fields, or administrative experience in environmental governance. |
- Strength of the Tribunal:
- Minimum 10 and maximum 20 Judicial Members
- Minimum 10 and maximum 20 Expert Members
- Term of Office: Members are appointed for a term of 5 years
- Non-Reappointment: To ensure unbiased decision-making during their tenure, members are not eligible for re-appointment once their term ends.
What are the objectives & functions of NGT?
- Expeditious Justice: To ensure environmental cases are settled within 6 months of filing, preventing long-drawn-out legal battles that often allow environmental damage to continue.
- Specialized Adjudication: To provide a forum where technical environmental issues are handled by people who actually understand the science (Expert Members) alongside legal professionals.
- Enforcement of Rights: To protect the citizen’s right to a healthy environment, which the Supreme Court of India considers a part of the “Right to Life” under Article 21 of the Constitution.
- Reducing Judicial Burden: To take the weight of thousands of complex environmental cases off the shoulders of the High Courts and the Supreme Court.
What is the jurisdiction of the National Green Tribunal (NGT)?
- Original Jurisdiction: The NGT only has the power to hear civil cases that involve a “substantial question relating to the environment.” These questions must arise from the implementation of the following seven laws listed in Schedule I of the NGT Act:
- The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
- The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977
- The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980
- The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981
- The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
- The Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991
- The Biological Diversity Act, 2002
- Appellate Jurisdiction: NGT also acts as an appellate body. It can hear appeals against specific orders or decisions made by various authorities (like CPCB, SPCBs, State governemnts) under the laws mentioned above. For example, if a government authority grants or refuses an environmental clearance, or if a State Pollution Control Board issues certain directions, an aggrieved party can appeal that decision to the NGT.
What are the powers of NGT?
- Power of a Civil Court: It has the same powers as a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) for summoning witnesses, requiring discovery of documents, and receiving evidence on oath.
- Power to Grant Relief & Compensation: It can award monetary damages to victims of pollution and order the restitution of damaged property or restoration of the environment.
- Regulatory Independence: It is not strictly bound by the “Indian Evidence Act” or “CPC.” Instead, it is guided by the Principles of Natural Justice, allowing it to be more flexible and faster than regular courts.
- Penalties for Non-Compliance: If a person or organization fails to comply with an NGT order, the Tribunal can impose severe punishments like Imprisonment up to 3y, fine (Individual) up to ₹10 crore, fine (Company) up to ₹10 crore.
- Suo Motu Powers: The NGT has the unique authority to take up cases on its own based on media reports or public information, even if no formal complaint has been filed by an affected party.
What is the significance of NGT?
- Faster Justice Delivery: Before the NGT, environmental cases would languish in civil courts for decades. The NGT is mandated to deliver a final decision within 6 months.
- Scientific Decision Making: Environmental law is complex and involves data on carbon emissions, effluent levels, and biodiversity. Since the NGT bench includes scientists and environmental experts alongside judges, the rulings are based on technical accuracy rather than just legal technicalities. This reduces the reliance on external committees, which often delayed court proceedings in the past.
- Upholding Global Environmental Principles: The NGT has been a pioneer in enforcing three major international legal doctrines:
- Polluter Pays: It has slapped massive fines on major corporations and state governments for dumping waste or polluting rivers.
- Precautionary Principle: It can stop a project before damage occurs if there is a high risk to the ecosystem.
- Intergenerational Equity: Ensuring that today’s development doesn’t rob future generations of clean air and water.
- Self-Initiative: It can take up cases on its own (Suo Motu) based on a news report or even a letter from a concerned citizen, ensuring that even marginalized communities have a voice against powerful industrial lobbies.
- Enhancing Access to Justice: Relaxed procedures, suo motu powers, and broad “aggrieved person” definition make it easier for citizens and groups to seek environmental justice.
- Institutional Primacy & Trust: NGT has been recognized by the Supreme Court as the primary body for environmental oversight, entrusted with monitoring complex national issues like river pollution.
- Expanding the Right to Life: The NGT has played a crucial role in expanding the interpretation of the Indian Constitution. Its proactive interventions have effectively extended the scope of the right to a clean environment as an integral part of the fundamental Right to Life (Article 21).
What are some of the landmark judgments of NGT?
| Shivalik Hills “Vanishing Hills” Case (Punjab) |
|
| Morbi Ceramic Units Case (Gujarat) |
|
| Bhopal Adampur Waste Plant Case (Madhya Pradesh) |
|
| Ban on Old Vehicles in Delhi (2015) |
|
| Yamuna Floodplain Case (2016) |
|
What are the limitations/criticisms of NGT?
- Persistent Vacancies: By law, the NGT should have a minimum of 10 Judicial and 10 Expert members. However, it often operates with far fewer, leading to a massive backlog of cases. Lack of appointments has occasionally forced regional benches (like Chennai or Kolkata) to shut down temporarily, forcing litigants to travel to the Principal Bench in New Delhi or attend hearings via video conferencing.
- Limited Jurisdiction: Despite being the primary environmental court, the NGT cannot hear cases under two very important laws Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 & Indian Forest Act, 1927. This creates a fragmented system where a person might have to go to the NGT for a pollution issue but to a regular civil court for a wildlife-related grievance in the same area.
- Appeals to Higher Courts: Almost every major NGT order is immediately challenged in the Supreme Court. This often leads to “litigation fatigue,” where the environmental damage continues while the case is stuck in the superior court’s appeals process.
- Lack of “Teeth” for Execution: The NGT relies on state pollution control boards and local authorities to enforce its orders. If these bodies are corrupt or inefficient, the NGT’s ruling remains only on paper.
- Arbitrary Fines: Often, fines ranging from ₹5 crore to ₹100 crore are imposed based on a company’s revenue rather than a scientific assessment of the actual environmental damage caused. This has led to many NGT orders being stayed or overturned by the Supreme Court on the grounds that the penalties were “vague” or “unscientific.”
- The “Pro-Project” Shift (2020–2025):
- An investigation done by the Indian Express of over 100,000 NGT orders reveals a startling asymmetry in how the tribunal rules on environmental and forest clearances (EC/FC).
- For e.g. of the 329 appeals filed by citizens & activists against the grant of clearances by the govt, only in 20% cases did the NGT rule in favour of the appeal.
Conversely, when the project’s proponents appealed against the denial of clearances by the govt, in nearly 80% of the cases, they secured relief.
This is not a historical norm, as data from 2016-2019 shows a more balanced approach where both sides hovered between 18% & 31%.
- Conflict of Interest in “Expertise”: Out of 13 expert members appointed since 2016, 9 were part of decision making process for granting various green clearances at the highest level of the govt. In contrast, before 2016, only 2 of the 11 experts were associated with govt’s green clearance process. This raises the question of conflict of interests & propriety as the Tribunal’s appellate jurisdiction covers all govt orders, including project clearances issued under Envt Protection Act 1986 & Forest Conservation Act 1980.
- Dismissal on “Technical Grounds”: Public grievances are increasingly being silenced by procedural technicalities rather than being heard on merit. The NGT follows a strict 90 days appeal filing deadline. A significant number of citizen appeals are being dismissed on technical grounds, labelled as ‘time barred’ for being filed after more than 90 days.
What can be the way forward?
- Mandatory Full Strength: The government should be legally mandated to maintain the minimum strength of 10 Judicial and 10 Expert members. Delays in appointments should be treated as a violation of the NGT Act.
- Academic & Independent Experts: Instead of almost exclusively appointing retired Indian Forest Service (IFS) or government officers, the NGT should include active environmental scientists, ecologists, and independent researchers from top universities and NGOs.
- Transparency in Selection: The selection process for members should be made public, with clear criteria to prevent the appointment of “pro-project” individuals who might have a conflict of interest.
- Monitoring Wing: Currently, the NGT depends on State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) to enforce its orders. A dedicated monitoring wing within the NGT could conduct independent “surprise audits” to ensure compliance.
- Uniform Compensation Framework: As suggested by the CPCB in late 2025, there should be a standardized formula for calculating environmental fines. This would move away from “arbitrary” fines and make the orders harder to challenge in the Supreme Court.
- Include Wildlife and Indian Forest Acts: Bringing the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and the Indian Forest Act, 1927 under the NGT’s umbrella would create a “one-stop shop” for environmental justice, preventing litigants from having to run between different courts for the same project.
- Relaxing the “90-Day” Rule: The strict timeline for filing appeals often penalizes rural communities who may not find out about a project’s “Environmental Clearance” until it’s too late. The Tribunal should have more flexibility to condone delays in public interest cases.
- Multilingual Proceedings: Making judgments and notices available in regional languages (not just English) would empower local communities to participate in the judicial process more effectively.
| UPSC GS-2: Polity Read More: The Indian Express |
