NGT Cannot Abdicate Adjudicatory Function To Expert Committees; Final Decision Must Be Of Tribunal: Supreme Court
The Apex Court held that expert committees only aid adjudication and cannot substitute the decision-making function of the National Green Tribunal, which is statutorily vested with adjudicatory authority.
The Supreme Court has held that the constitution of an Expert Committee does not absolve the National Green Tribunal of its duty to adjudicate and that adjudicatory functions cannot be delegated to such committees, as the final decision must be rendered by the Tribunal itself.
The Court was hearing civil appeals challenging orders of the National Green Tribunal, which had disposed of proceedings by directing a committee to take a final decision on the issue of the establishment of a petrol pump.
A Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice K. Vinod Chandran observed: “… the adjudicatory authority cannot blindly adopt the conclusion of a fact-finding committee constituted to aid in deciding the issues agitated before it in accordance with law; which decision has to be of the authority and not that of the committee”.
Raghavendra P. Shankar, ASG, appeared for the appellants, while Kausar Raza Faridi, AOR, represented the respondents.
Background
The dispute arose from objections raised before the National Green Tribunal regarding the establishment of a petrol pump, alleging violation of siting criteria prescribed under guidelines issued by the Central Pollution Control Board.
The NGT, instead of adjudicating the matter on merits, constituted a committee comprising various authorities to examine compliance with the guidelines. The committee submitted reports, and the NGT disposed of the matter by directing the committee to take a final decision.
Subsequently, an execution petition was filed, wherein the NGT issued further directions based on the committee’s report without issuing notice to the affected parties.
The appellants challenged these orders, contending that the NGT had abdicated its adjudicatory function and acted in violation of principles of natural justice.
Court’s Observation
The Court examined the statutory scheme of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 and reiterated that the NGT is an adjudicatory body vested with judicial powers, and cannot divest itself of such functions.
The Court relied on precedents including Sanghar Zuber Ismail v. Union of India (2021), Kantha Vibhag Yuva Koli Samaj Parivartan Trust v. State of Gujarat (2023), and Singrauli Super Thermal Power Station v. Ashwani Kumar Dubey (2023) to emphasise that expert committees only assist and do not replace adjudication.
The Court clarified that there is a fundamental distinction between fact-finding assistance and adjudicatory determination, and that the latter must be performed by the Tribunal itself, emphasising that “the role of an expert committee appointed by an adjudicatory forum is only to assist and not to adjudicate”.
While referring to Sanghar Zuber Ismail v. Union of India (2021), the Bench further remarked that “the constitution of an Expert Committee does not absolve the NGT of its duty to adjudicate and that such adjudicatory functions cannot be assigned to committees, even, Expert Committees when the final decision has to be of the NGT, the appellate authority which itself is constituted as an adjudicatory authority under an Act of the Parliament.”
The Court found that in the present case, the NGT had effectively delegated its decision-making authority to the committee and disposed of the matter without recording independent findings. It held that such an approach amounted to abdication of jurisdiction, while observing that “this is a classic case of how a busybody stalled the commencement of a petrol pump, thus frustrating the establishment of a commercial enterprise and the setting up of a public utility outlet for about six years."
The Court also found a serious violation of principles of natural justice in the manner in which the execution petition was disposed of. It noted that directions were issued without notice to the affected parties and without granting an opportunity to respond to the committee reports.
The Court further emphasised the constitution of the NGT as a "judicial body exercising adjudicatory functions, in an adversarial system, in accordance with law and also in compliance with the principles of natural justice, expressly envisaged and mandated in Section 19 (1) of the NGT Act".
The Court concluded that, in the case at hand, the “NGT disposed of the matter, leaving the adjudicatory process to the Committee, which has resulted in a stalemate, leaving the establishment of a public utility outlet in limbo and the entrepreneurs without remedy, despite all statutory clearances having been obtained”.
Conclusion
The Court allowed the appeals, set aside the orders passed by the National Green Tribunal, and directed the competent authority to consider the matter afresh in accordance with law.
Cause Title: Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. v. Deepak Sharma & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2026 INSC 278)
Appearances
Appellants: Raghavendra P. Shankar, ASG with Priya Puri, Pallavi Mishra, Neelabh Bisht, Sachin Dubey, Abhishek Mishra, Sharad Kumar Puri, Riya Dogra and others, Advocates
Respondents: Kausar Raza Faridi, AOR; Siddhartha Iyer, Advocate; Ila Shikhar Sheel, AOR; Aman Gupta, Advocate; Srishti Ghoshal, Advocate; Shristi Agrawal, Advocate