Introduction

The landmark judgment in CITIZENS FOR GREEN DOON v. UNION OF INDIA (2021 INSC 740) addresses the complexities surrounding forest clearances and the jurisdictional boundaries of the National Green Tribunal (NGT). The case revolves around the appellant, Citizens for Green Doon, challenging the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change's (MoEF&CC) Stage-I Forest Clearances for the expansion of National Highway No 72A and subsequent tree felling permissions granted by the Divisional Forest Officer (DFO). Central to the dispute is the appropriate avenue for legal recourse, whether through the original or appellate jurisdiction of the NGT.

Summary of the Judgment

The appellant initially filed a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution, challenging the Stage-I Forest Clearances and Wildlife Clearance associated with the road project. The Supreme Court directed the appellants to approach the NGT, allowing them to challenge the Stage-I Clearances and granting permission to contest the Wildlife Clearance at an appropriate stage.

Subsequently, the appellant approached the NGT under its original jurisdiction, which the Tribunal dismissed, citing the appellant's attempt to bypass its appellate jurisdiction. The Tribunal also upheld the validity of the Stage-I Clearance, emphasizing compliance with simplified procedures and lack of material evidence indicating legal violations.

Citizens for Green Doon appealed this decision to the Supreme Court, arguing that the Tribunal erred in rejecting their application under the original jurisdiction and that the lack of public disclosure of tree-felling permissions impeded their ability to seek appellate remedies.

The Supreme Court, upon reviewing the circumstances, found that the permission for tree felling was indeed an order amenable to appeal under Section 16(e) of the NGT Act, especially considering the directives of the circular dated 28 August 2015. Consequently, the Court set aside the Tribunal's judgment, restored the appellant's original application, and granted an interim stay on further tree felling until the Tribunal could reassess the case.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

The judgment references several key precedents that shape the environmental jurisprudence in India:

• H.P. Bus-Stand Management & Development Authority vs Central Empowered Committee (2021) 4 SCC 309: This case elaborated on the "environmental rule of law," emphasizing transparency, accountability, and participatory governance in environmental decision-making.
• Vimal Bhai vs Union of India (2012 SCC OnLine NGT 77): The Tribunal's decision in this case clarified the commencement of the cause of action for filing an appeal, emphasizing the importance of public disclosure of forest clearances.

These precedents influenced the Supreme Court's approach in evaluating the merits of jurisdiction and the necessity for transparency in environmental governance.

Legal Reasoning

The core legal issue centered on whether the appellant could invoke the NGT's original jurisdiction under Section 14 of the NGT Act or should resort to its appellate jurisdiction under Section 16(e). The Tribunal had previously rejected the appellant's original jurisdiction challenge, asserting that the appellant was attempting to circumvent the designated appellate pathway.

The Supreme Court dissected the provisions of Section 16(e) in conjunction with Section 2A of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, and the circular dated 28 August 2015. It concluded that the permission for tree felling constituted an order under Section 2 of the FC Act, thus falling squarely within the scope of appeal under Section 16(e) of the NGT Act.

Furthermore, the Court highlighted the discrepancy in the DFO's responses to RTI queries versus the actual permissions granted, underscoring the importance of transparency as a cornerstone of the environmental rule of law.

Impact

This judgment significantly impacts future environmental litigation by:

• Clarifying Jurisdiction: It delineates the boundaries between the original and appellate jurisdictions of the NGT, ensuring that appellants utilize the correct legal pathways.
• Emphasizing Transparency: Reinforcing the mandate that environmental clearances and permissions must be publicly disclosed, thereby enhancing accountability of authorities.
• Strengthening Environmental Rule of Law: By mandating clear avenues for legal challenges and ensuring that environmental governance adheres to principles of openness and participatory decision-making.

Overall, the decision fortifies legal mechanisms available to civil society and environmental activists to hold government authorities accountable for ecological impacts of large-scale projects.

Complex Concepts Simplified

National Green Tribunal (NGT)

The NGT is a specialized judicial body established under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, dedicated to handling environmental disputes and cases related to environmental protection and conservation of forests and other natural resources.

Section 14 and Section 16(e) of the NGT Act

Section 14 pertains to the original jurisdiction of the NGT, allowing it to hear cases involving substantial questions related to the environment.

Section 16(e) provides for the appellate jurisdiction of the NGT, enabling appeals against orders or decisions made by the State Government or other authorities under specific environmental laws.

Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (FC Act)

The FC Act regulates the diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes, ensuring that such actions do not adversely affect the environment. It mandates prior approval from the Central Government for forest land use and outlines procedures for compensatory afforestation.

Appellate vs. Original Jurisdiction

Appellate Jurisdiction refers to the authority of a higher court or tribunal to review and revise the decisions of a lower court or tribunal.

Original Jurisdiction is the authority to hear a case for the first time, as opposed to on appeal.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court's judgment in CITIZENS FOR GREEN DOON v. UNION OF INDIA serves as a pivotal reference in environmental jurisprudence, particularly concerning the jurisdictional dynamics of the NGT. By affirming the appellate route under Section 16(e) for challenges related to forest clearances and emphasizing the necessity for transparency, the Court bolsters the legal framework that safeguards environmental governance.

Key takeaways include:

• The clarified jurisdictional pathways within the NGT Act empower appellants to effectively utilize appellate mechanisms for environmental grievances.
• Transparency in environmental clearances is non-negotiable, ensuring that public participation and oversight are integral to environmental decision-making processes.
• The judgment reinforces the environmental rule of law, fostering a culture of accountability and participatory governance essential for sustainable development.

This decision not only provides recourse to environmental activists and citizens but also sets a precedent for how environmental clearances are to be managed with integrity and openness, ultimately contributing to the preservation of ecological balance.