National Green Tribunal
Shailesh Sahoo Convenor vs State Of Odisha & Ors on 22 May, 2024
Item No.3 (Court No. 2)
BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI.
(Through Physical Hearing with Hybrid V.C. Option)
Original Application No. 21/2024
Shailesh Sahoo ...Applicant
Versus
State of Odisha & Ors. ...Respondents
Date of hearing: 22.05.2024
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER.
HON'BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER.
Applicant: None for the Applicant.
Application is registered based on a letter petition received by email.
ORDER
1. Mr. Shailesh Sahoo had sent by email the present letter petition to this Tribunal, which has been treated and registered as O.A. No. 21/2024 complaining about encroachments and raising of illegal constructions over Mahanadi river bed under Naya Bazar Block of Cuttack City in District Cuttack, Odisha.
2. The above said original application was put up before this Bench on 19.02.2024 and this Bench took cognizance and constituted a Joint Committee with direction to submit its report before the Hon'ble Eastern Zone Bench of this Tribunal and directed the Registry to list the matter before the Hon'ble Eastern Zone Bench of this Tribunal after obtaining the permission from the Hon'ble Chairperson.
O.A. No.21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors. -2-
3. The application was listed before the Hon'ble Eastern Zone Bench of this Tribunal on 23.04.2024. Hon'ble Eastern Zone Bench of this Tribunal noticed intemperate language used by the applicant in the original application. Hon'ble Eastern Zone Bench of this Tribunal expressed its disapproval of use of such intemperate language and declined to entertain the original application while making reference to Hon'ble Chairperson who directed the matter to be listed before this Bench.
4. No doubt, in the original application the applicant has used intemperate language abusive of the officers who were mentioned by designation in the application but we are of the considered view that averments made in the application regarding encroachments and raising of illegal construction over Mahanadi River bed under Naya Bazar Block of Cuttack City in District Cuttack, Odisha raises serious environmental questions and the original application cannot be thrown on the ground of use of intemperate language in the application by the applicant. On the other hand appropriate action may be taken against the applicant for use of such intemperate language in accordance with law.
5. The Joint Committee constituted by this Tribunal vide order dated 19.02.2024 did not submit its report before the Hon'ble Eastern Zone Bench of this Tribunal. The Joint Committee is directed to submit its report before this Bench within two months by email at [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/OCR Support PDF and not in the form of Image PDF.
6. In view of the averments in the application, we also consider it appropriate to have response of (1) State of Odisha through Chief Secretary, Government of Odisha, (2) Additional Chief Secretary, Forest, Environment O.A. No.21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors. -3- Department and Climate Change, Government of Odisha, (3) Principal Secretary, Water and Resources Department, Government of Odisha (4) Vice Chairman, Cuttack Development Authority, (5) Member Secretary, Odisha State Pollution Control Board and (6) the District Magistrate, Cuttack who stand impleaded as respondents No. 1 to 6. The Registry is directed to prepare and attach memo of parties to the application and issue notices to respondents No. 1 to 6 requiring them to file their reply/response with respect to encroachments and raising of illegal constructions over Mahanadi river bed under Naya Bazar Block of Cuttack City within two months at [email protected] preferably in the form of searchable PDF/OCR Supported PDF and not in the form of Image PDF.
7. It may be observed here that in the present case two applications were sent one by post which is placed at page no. 7 and 8 and another by email which is placed at page no. 10. Ms. Pratima Akolkar recommended on application received by post that application may be considered in view of direction of Tribunal on relevant matter as referred but recommended on the second application that application may not be considered. Her recommendation of the second application received by email has been referred to by Hon'ble Eastern Zone Bench in paras no. 5 and 6 of its order but evidently said recommendation was made in view of the fact that recommendation for considering the application had already been made on another application.
8. It may be added here that application dated 21.07.2023 sent in the name of Convener, Public Forum, Odisha, Cuttack, which was treated and registered as original application and listed before this Bench, does not bear signature of any person.
O.A. No.21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors. -4-
9. In Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai V/s. Ankita Sinha and others 2021 SSC Online SC 897 Hon'ble Supreme Court considered the question whether the National Green Tribunal has the power to exercise Suo Motu jurisdiction in discharge of its functions under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 and declared that the National Green Tribunal is vested with suo motu power in discharge of its functions under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. In that case the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as under:
".....37. When the Registry of the NGT does indeed receive a communication or letter, including matters published in media, it may cause to initiate suo motu action by inviting attention of NGT to such matters in the form of office report. Such circumstances would however require a notice to be given to the sender of the communication or author of the news item, as the case may be, to assist the NGT in the course of hearing and to substantiate the factual matters. It must also be said that the exercise of suo motu jurisdiction does not mean eschewing with the principles of natural justice and fair play. In other words, the party likely to be affected should be afforded due opportunity to present their side, before suffering adverse orders....."
10. We are of the considered view that when the letter petitions are listed before the bench for taking cognizance/passing of appropriate orders:-
i. such letter petitions may also be scrutinized on same parameters as are applied to original applications filed before this Tribunal as applicable to the same;
ii. in view of direction given by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Para 37 of its Judgment titled as Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai V/s. Ankita Sinha and others 2021 SSC Online SC 897 appropriate communication be made with the applicant for assisting this Tribunal in the course of hearing and to substantiate the factual matters;
O.A. No.21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors. -5-
iii. the applicant may also be informed about the date of hearing fixed and VC link be also sent to him for joining the proceedings on that date;
iv. the Registry may also ascertain from the applicant as to whether he requires any legal aid and if the applicant seeks legal aid, legal aid may be provided to the applicant; and v. the Registry may also make report regarding filing of any other application regarding the same grievance/cause of action by the same applicant or any other person and current status of the same as to pendency/disposal thereof.
11. List on 20.08.2024 for further consideration.
12. A copy of this order be sent to the Members of the Joint Committee constituted by this Tribunal vide order dated 19.02.2024 by email for requisite compliance.
13. A copy of this order be also sent to Learned Registrar General, Principal Bench of this Tribunal for issuance of appropriate instructions in view of the observations made by this Bench after obtaining appropriate order from the Hon'ble Chairperson of this Tribunal.
Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM May 22nd, 2024 ag