Providing Single Member Appellate Authority Under Air Act & Water Act Not In Conflict With Law: Punjab & Haryana High Court
The Punjab & Haryana High Court was considering a Writ Petition seeking quashment of notifications amending the Haryana (Prevention and Control of Water Pollution) Rules, 1978 and the Haryana Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules, 1983 for providing a single member Appellate Authority.
Chief Justice Sheel Nagu, Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal, Punjab & Haryana High Court
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has upheld the notification providing for a single member Appellate Authority for matters arising out of the Air Act and Water Act as not being violative of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the matter of A.P. Pollution Control Board Versus Prof. M.V. Nayudu (Retd.), 1999.
The Court was considering a Writ Petition seeking quashment of notifications amending the Haryana (Prevention and Control of Water Pollution) Rules, 1978 and the Haryana Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules, 1983 for providing a single member Appellate Authority.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Anupinder Singh Grewal held, "In view of above discussion, this Court has no manner of doubt that providing for a single member Appellate Authority under Air Act and Water Act, vide notifications dated 20.11.2019 (Annexures P-4 and P-5), does not violate the law laid down by Apex Court in A.P. Pollution Control Board's Case (supra), especially when viewed from the context of existing laws relating to environment prevailing at the time when Apex Court pronounced decision in A.P. Pollution Control Board’s case (supra)."
The Petitioner was represented by Advocate Jitender Dhanda while the Respondent was represented by Additional Advocate General Deepak Balyan.
Facts of the Case
Counsel for the Petitioner argued that the said notifications are in direct contravention to the Supreme Court's ruling in A.P. Pollution Control Board Versus Prof. M.V. Nayudu (Retd.), 1999 to the extent that it lays down that composition of Appellate Authorities in matters relating to environmental laws ought to be manned by technical personnel in addition to judicial members, thus assuming duplicity in the composition of Appellate Authority.
On the other hand, the State of Haryana filed its Written Statement defending the said notifications primarily on the ground that the need emphasized by Apex Court in A.P. Pollution Control Board's case (supra) of having a technical member with expertise in the field of environment as an essential part of Appellate Authority is obviated by constitution of National Green Tribunal under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.
The State further pointed out various amendments caused in the Air Act, especially Section 31B, where the remedy of appeal was provided before the Tribunal to a person aggrieved by an order or decision of the Appellate Authority under Section 31.
Similar amendments carried out in the Water Act were also pointed out by the State, especially Section 33B, which extends a person aggrieved against an order or decision of the Appellate Authority under Section 28, or against an order passed by the State Government under Section 29, to approach the Tribunal.
The State thus urged that the Tribunal has a team of ten to twenty technical members who can very well cover up the lacuna, if any, in the composition of the Appellate Authority and due to financial constraints, no useful purpose will be served with three members.
Reasoning By Court
The Court at the outset observed that a perusal of the decision in A.P. Pollution Control (supra), makes it obvious that the law that was laid down by Apex Court mandating Appellate Authority to be a multi member body, including a technical expert as a member was laid down in the era when NGT Act had not been promulgated.
".....This Court is in conferment with view of the State that once a statutory Tribunal, namely National Green Tribunal has been constituted and has started functioning, which inter alia comprises of experts in the field of environment as Expert Members, the pressing need for the Appellate Authority under Air Act and Water Act to be comprised inter-alia of a member in the filed of environment gets obviated. Thus, the absence of an Expert Member as part of Appellate Authority does not occasion any disadvantage to the person aggrieved approaching the Appellate Authority," the Court observed.
It went on to state that the NGT can very well entertain and adjudicate issues, especially arising out of implementation of enactments of the Air Act and Water Act.
The Court pointed out that the impugned notifications ensure that in case of Single Member Appellate Authority, the sole member has enough experience/expertise in the field of environment to obviate the apprehensions expressed by the Apex Court in (supra).
"A bare perusal of aforesaid provisions clearly reveals that the enactment of Air Act and Water Act empower the State to have a single or three member body as the Appellate Authority. Thus, if the State vide notifications dated 20.11.2019 (Annexures P-4 and P-5) has provided for a single body as per the Appellate Authority under Air Act and Water Act, then the power exercised by the State is within the four corners of the said enactments," the Court held.
The Petition was accordingly dismissed.
Cause Title: Sunil vs. State of Haryana and others (2025:PHHC:076930-DB)
Appearances:
Petitioner- Advocate Jitender Dhanda, Advocate Suman Sagar
Respondent- Additional Advocate General Deepak Balyan
