‘All NGT benches equal, one in Delhi not appellate authority’

Pointing   out   that   the   NGT Act says the bench in  Delhi  has  territorial  jurisdiction only to specified   states   like   other   benches, including  Southern  Zone  bench, a  division  bench  comprising  Justices  N  Kirubakaran  and  TV  Thamil-selvi   said   the   decision   given by any bench dealing  with any  issue would have   pan India effect.

“It cannot be said only if the issue is decided by the bench at Delhi, it will have pan India effect.”  The Southern Bench’s observation did  not  appear  to  be  in  consonance with the  provisions  of  the Act,  the  court  said,  adding:  “Vesting  of  power  only  with  the  bench  at  New  Delhi is not contemplated anywhere in the statute, even though power is  concentrated  at  New  Delhi.

”The  court  also  pointed  out  that  the  jurisdiction  of  every  bench  has  been  distinctly given only  to  enable  citizens  to  approach  the  forum  constituted in their zone instead of having to travel to New Delhi spending  huge  amount,  which is not possible for every   citizen   for   each   and every issue.

“If  such  a  procedure  is  adopted,  it would  amount  to  denying  access  to  justice  as  is  being  done  in  other  matters.  Every  effort  is  being taken to deliver justice  at  the  doorsteps  of  citizens.

Grama  Nyayalayas  are  sought  to  be  established   to   deliver   justice  to  rural  people  in   a   quick   and   easy   manner. That is the reason  why  courts  are  being  established  at  taluk  level,”  the  bench  led  by  Justice Kirubakaran said.  Petitioner’s  counsel  A Yogershwaran had submitted that every bench of the NGT was equal, with none of them called Principal   Bench.

If    the    order    transferring  the  case  to  Delhi Bench is given effect  to,  it  would  appear  as  if  that  bench  has  appellate  jurisdiction.  “It  will  create  an  artificial  hierarchy,  which  is  unknown under the scheme of  the Act. Thus, the transfer itself is unwarranted and illegal,”  he  contended.  The  petitioner     had     challenged the Official Memorandum issued on  November 2020, which held that no fresh environmental impact  assessment  was required in case of change of coal sources by the industries  for  the  use  of  thermal   power   plants.   The challenge was on the ground that such a move would have huge impact on the environment