Technicalities Overstretched: Supreme Court Orders Original Application Filed U/S.14 Of NGT Act To Be Treated As Appeal

The Appeal before the Apex Court was filed against the order dismissing the application filed by the appellant under section 14 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, in which the order granting sanction was challenged.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar said, “Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that this is a case where there has been miscarriage of justice and technicalities have been overstretched to dismiss and oust the appellant, Vijay Kumar Padalia.”

Senior Advocate Chander Uday Singh represented the Appellant while AOR Vanshaja Shukla represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The appellant, Vijay Kumar Padalia, had earlier filed an Original Application for restraining the respondents therein and other State functionaries/authorities from constructing the motor road from NH-87 (now, NH-109)/Dakarauli to Malla Niglat, and for other ancillary reliefs, including a direction to the respondents not to cut, destroy, damage or degrade any tree/forest cover. This application was permitted to be withdrawn, vide order dated August 2, 2018 with liberty to file a comprehensive application, incorporating subsequent developments. This order was passed in view of the statement made on behalf of the appellant that he had come to know about the issuance of forest clearance.

Thereafter, the appellant filed what he believed was a comprehensive petition under Section 14 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, which was registered as an Original Application No. 522/2018. The impugned judgment dismissed the aforesaid Original Application, not on merits, but on the ground that in the said Original Application, the order granting sanction was challenged and, therefore, the appellant should have filed an appeal under Section 16 of the NGT Act. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant approached the Apex Court.

Reasoning

The Bench noted that the National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, should have permitted the appellant to either amend the Original Application or permitted him to file a fresh appeal under Section 16 of the NGT Act. “It is quite apparent that the appellant, Vijay Kumar Padalia, had proceeded in terms of and in accord with the language of the order dated 02.08.2018 passed by the NGT itself”, it said.

Thus, the Bench set aside the impugned order with an order of remand to the NGT. “Original Application No. 522/2018 will be treated as an appeal under Section 16 of the NGT Act, preferred by the appellant, Vijay Kumar Padalia. We grant liberty to the appellant, Vijay Kumar Padalia, to amend the said Original Application to bring it in conformity with the procedural requirements of an appeal, as stipulated. In addition, the appellant, Vijay Kumar Padalia, may file a separate petition under Section 14 of the NGT Act. The aforesaid fresh Original Application may be filed within a period of three weeks from today”, it ordered.

On the issue of limitation, the Bench held that if required and necessary, it will be open to the appellant to file an application seeking condonation of delay and rely upon Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Allowing the appeal, the Bench requested the NGT to take up the matter for hearing expeditiously.

Cause Title: Vijay Kumar Padalia v. State of Uttarakhand & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 660)

Appearance:

Appellant: Senior Advocate Chander Uday Singh, Advocates Surekha Raman, Amarjit Singh Bedi, Shreyash Kumar, AOR M/s. K.J. John And Co

Respondent: AOR Vanshaja Shukla, Advocates Ankeeta Appanna, Rachna Gandhi, Mukesh Verma, Kamal Kumar Pandey, Krishna Prakash Dubey, Rubi Kumari, Manisha, AOR Shashank Singh

Click here to read/download Order