Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

There is no dispute that there is a provision of appeal under section 22 of the Act, 2010 but the question is as to whether the jurisdiction of High Courts sitting under Article 226 is barred, to answer this issue, it would be relevant to consider the various provisions of National Green Tribunal Act vis-à-vis the authoritative pronouncement of Hon'ble Apex Court regarding power of judicial review vested upon High Courts which is the basic structure of the Constitution and can the Parliament bar the jurisdiction by way of Parliamentary Act contrary to the mandate of the Constitution, to answer this issue it would be relevant to refer the ratio laid down in the judgment rendered in the case where the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 has been questioned. The Administrative Tribunal Act was enacted under Article 323- A(1) which was introduced by the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976. Clause (2)(d) of Article 323-A specifically authorizes the exclusion of jurisdiction of High Court under Articles 226 and 227 by any law made by the Parliament, while answering the issue, the 5 Judges Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of S.P. Sampath Kumar Vrs. Union of India and Others, reported in (1987) 1 SCC 124 has observed that though judicial review is a basic and essential feature of the Constitution and it cannot be abrogated without affecting the basic structure of the Constitution, but if any constitutional amendment made by Parliament takes away from the High Court the power of judicial review in any particular area and vests it in any other institutional mechanism or authority, it would not be violative of the basic structure of doctrine, so long as the essential condition is fulfilled, namely, that the alternative institutional mechanism or authority set up by the parliamentary amendment is no less effective than the High Court.

The doctrine of basic structure was evolved in Kesavananda Bharati case. In Kesavananda Bharati case a thirteen Judge Constitution Bench, by a majority of 7:6, held that though, by virtue of Article 368, Parliament is empowered to amend the Constitution, that power cannot be exercised so as to damage the basic feature of the constitution or to destroy its basic structure. The identification of features which constitute the basic structure of our Constitution has been subject matter of great debate in Indian Constitutional Law.