Delhi High Court - Orders
M/S Jsw Steel Limited vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 November, 2024
Author: Sanjeev Narula
Bench: Sanjeev Narula
$~83
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 15771/2024
M/S JSW STEEL LIMITED .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Sanjeev Kapoor, Mr.
Aakash Bajaj, Ms. Prerona Banarjee,
Ms. Sania Abbasi, Ms. Riya Kumari,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Varun Pratap Singh, Advocate for
Mr. Kirtiman Singh, CGSC for UOI
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
ORDER
% 13.11.2024 CM APPL. 66165/2024 (Exemption)
1. Exemption is granted, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The Applicant shall file legible and clearer copies of exempted documents, compliant with practice rules, before the next date of hearing.
3. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. CM APPL. 66164/2024 (for stay)
4. The present petition impugns order dated 21 st October, 2024,1 passed by the National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi,2 in Miscellaneous Application No. 988/2024. The said order was passed by the NGT in exercise of its suo moto jurisdiction in view of the Supreme Court's 1 "the impugned order"
2"NGT, Principal Bench"W.P.(C) 15771/2024 Page 1 of 6
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/11/2024 at 00:31:52 decision in Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Ankita Sinha and Others,3 on the basis of a letter dated 13th December, 2023 sent by Jambaiah K, Respondent No. 4, to the NGT, Principal Bench complaining that Petitioner's Integrated Waste Management Unit in 575 acres of land in Village Sultanpur under Gram Panchayat Torangallu District Bellary, State of Karnataka,4 is contributing towards water and air pollution in the nearby areas, thereby causing health hazards. The impugned order directed the formation of a Joint Committee comprising of Karnataka State Pollution Control Board, Central Pollution Control Board, Integrated Regional Office, MoEF&CC, Bellary and District Magistrate, Bellary with a direction to visit the Petitioner's industrial unit, collect relevant information and submit a factual report to the Tribunal within one month.
5. Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Senior Counsel for the Petitioner, challenges the impugned order primarily on two grounds - he argues that the impugned order suffers from lack of jurisdiction and all consequential actions taken thereunder are de hors the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.5 He contends that NGT is a statutory authority established to exercise jurisdiction and powers within the confines of the NGT Act. The composition of the Tribunal is provided under Section 4 of the NGT Act. Further, sub-section (3) of Section 4 stipulates that the Central Government may, by notification, specify the ordinary place or places of sitting of the Tribunal, and the territorial jurisdiction falling under each such place of sitting. In furtherance of this provision, on 17th August, 2011, Ministry of Environment and Forests published a notification defining the ordinary places of sitting of the NGT 3 (2022) 13 SCC 401.
4"the industrial unit"W.P.(C) 15771/2024 Page 2 of 6
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/11/2024 at 00:31:52 and earmarking their jurisdiction. The same is extracted herein below:
6. Placing reliance on the afore-noted notification, Mr. Sethi argues that Petitioner's industrial unit, which is the subject matter of the complaint and 5 "NGT Act"
W.P.(C) 15771/2024 Page 3 of 6This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/11/2024 at 00:31:52 the impugned order, is located in the State of Karnataka, hence, the industrial unit falls within the jurisdiction of Southern Zone Bench of the NGT which sits at Chennai. He further urges that in similar circumstances, the NGT, Principal Bench has refused to entertain matters arising outside its jurisdiction and places reliance upon the decision in K. Sathyadevan v. Union of India & Ors.6
7. Furthermore, Mr. Sethi submits that this precise question of the territorial jurisdiction has been dealt in State of Telangana through its Chief Secretary, Khairatabad, Hyderabad, Telangana and another v. Md. Hayath Uddin and others,7 wherein the Division Bench of High Court of Hyderabad examined the framework of the NGT Act in relation to the question regarding the territorial jurisdiction of the NGT, Principal Bench. To this effect, the decision reads as follows:
"72. In the affidavit, in reply to the O.A filed by the first respondent- applicant, the petitioner herein specifically contended that the O.A should have been heard by a bench of the Southern Zone or the Western Zone of the NGT as the cause of action, to proceed against the purported illegal construction in the State of Telangana or Maharashtra, was beyond the boundaries of the territories over which the Principal Bench at New Delhi exercised jurisdiction. If that be so, the jurisdiction of the Judicial Member of the Northern Zonal Bench would not extend to his entertaining the O.A, if the cause of action had arisen substantially within the territorial limits of the Southern Zonal Bench of the NGT at Chennai, and partly within the territorial limits of the Western Zonal Bench of NGT at Pune. Despite the question of lack of territorial jurisdiction being urged and argued, the NGT failed to consider them. It is only if the NGT had examined these contentions, and had recorded its prima- facie finding that it has territorial jurisdiction to entertain the application, could it have, thereafter, considered the application for grant of interim relief. Since the objection to the jurisdiction of the NGT, to entertain the O.A, was taken at the first instance itself, 6 Original Application No. 1154/2024 decided on 12 th September, 2024.7
Writ Petition No. 34458/2017 decided on 8th November, 2017.W.P.(C) 15771/2024 Page 4 of 6
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/11/2024 at 00:31:53 failure of the NGT to decide this question of territorial jurisdiction, cannot result in denial of relief to the petitioner merely because the NGT has chosen to decide the application, for grant of interim relief, on its merits. If the order is of a Court/Tribunal having no jurisdiction, it must be set aside. (Adani Exports Ltd.28). Failure of the NGT to decide this preliminary objection, to its lack of territorial jurisdiction to entertain the O.A, would also necessitate the interim order of the NGT dated 05.10.2017 being set aside."
8. Mr. Sethi emphasises that the NGT has exceeded its jurisdiction by passing the impugned order ex-parte, contrary to Section 19(4)(i) of the NGT Act. He points out that the complaint was received by NGT nearly 10 months before the passing of the impugned order and there was no urgency that necessitated the passing of an ex-parte order without affording an opportunity to the Petitioner to respond to the allegations.
9. Mr. Varun Pratap Singh, counsel for Union of India, seeks a short accommodation to take instructions.
10. Having considered the above, the Court is satisfied that a prima facie case has been established in favour of the Petitioner on the issue of lack of territorial jurisdiction.
11. Accordingly, till the next date of hearing, the impugned order shall be stayed.
W.P.(C) 15771/2024
12. Issue notice. Mr. Varun Pratap Singh, counsel for Respondent No. 1 accepts notice. Counter affidavit be filed within a period of two weeks from today. Rejoinder thereto, be filed before the next date of hearing.
W.P.(C) 15771/2024 Page 5 of 6This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/11/2024 at 00:31:53
13. Issue notice to the remaining Respondents by all permissible modes, upon filing of process fee, returnable on the next date of hearing.
14. List on 11th December, 2024.
SANJEEV NARULA, J NOVEMBER 13, 2024/ab W.P.(C) 15771/2024 Page 6 of 6 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/11/2024 at 00:31:53