Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Patna High Court CWJC No.5104 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026

5. According to the petitioners, as per the procedure prescribed in the aforesaid notification for grant of environmental clearance, a sub-committee of SEIAA which is known as "State-Level Expert Appraisal Committee" (SEAC) had to complete the fourth stage procedure of appraisal as prescribed in the notification and the procedure for appraisal is specifically prescribed in Appendix-V to the notification consisting of paragraph no.5 which provides that "the applicant shall be informed at least 15 (fifteen) days prior to the scheduled date of the EAC/SEAC meeting for considering the project proposal".

7. It is also the case of the petitioners that the aforesaid recommendation of SEAC was accepted by the SEIAA in its meeting dated 07.01.2025 and consequently, the competent authority i.e. SEIAA issued the impugned environmental clearances vide letter dated 17.01.2025 which is under challenge.

8. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the minutes of meeting dated 03.08.2024 conducted by the SEAC being ex-parte is vitiated since the petitioners being project proponents have been denied the opportunity of attending the aforesaid meeting and put forth their contentions before the said sub committee.

11. It is, therefore, the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned recommendations of SEAC is violative of the aforesaid notification and accordingly the decision of the competent authority namely, SEIAA accepting the recommendations of SEAC and grant of environmental clearance are all illegal and liable to be quashed and set aside.

12. In support of the submissions, the learned counsel has placed reliance on the following judgments:-

reported as (2021) 6 SCC 15;

Patna High Court CWJC No.5104 of 2025 dt.20-01-2026 iv. C.B. Gautam vs. Union of India & Ors.

reported as (1993) 1 SCC 78.

13. The respondent nos. 3 and 4 have filed their para-wise counter affidavit, in which they have explained the process of consideration and issuance of environmental clearance.

14. Adverting to the counter affidavit, learned counsel for the respondent nos.3 and 4 has submitted that once the environmental clearance is granted in favour of the petitioners, the remedy lies before the National Green Tribunal under Section 16 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. It is submitted that the petitioner has assailed the decision of the SEAC, however, the aforesaid sub-committee is only an appraisal body and once the environmental clearnace has been duly issued by the SEIAA the decision of the subordinate body i.e. the SEAC merges with the final decision of SEIAA. In the present case, there is no challenge to the condition incorporated in the environmental clearance by the petitioners. Therefore, it is submitted that since the alternative remedy lies before the National Green Tribunal, the petitioners ought to have moved before the Tribunal.