While noting that the NGT ought to have remanded the matter to the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority, the Supreme Court has ordered that the environmental compensation that has to be paid by the Hotel for the illegal construction be redetermined.

The Apex Court was considering an appeal filed against the order passed by the National Green Tribunal, Western Zone Bench, Pune (NGT), in the year 2022. The matter revolved around the estimation of the damages resulting from the illegal construction put up by the appellant in monetary terms.

The Division Bench comprising Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Prasanna B. Varale held, “We hold that the opportunity given by the NGT to the appellant herein in an appeal is not the same quality of opportunity which the first respondent as an original Authority would have granted to the appellant herein. Therefore, we find that the NGT was not right in sustaining the impugned order dated 09.05.2022 passed by the appellant herein.”

Advocate Shiven Desai represented the Appellant, while Senior Advocate Sanjay Parikh represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

Pursuant to the directions issued by the High Court in a PIL Writ Petition, the first respondent, Coastal Zone Management Authority, sought to compute damages vis-a-vis the illegal construction put up by the appellant herein and estimated the damages resulting from the illegal construction put up by the appellant herein in monetary terms. The first respondent directed the appellant herein to pay a sum of Rs 2,04,19,560 towards environmental compensation.

Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellant preferred an appeal before the NGT, Western Zone. Although the NGT acknowledged the fact that the appellant was not heard in the matter, nevertheless, it did not remand the matter to the first respondent-management authority for a re-determination of the environmental compensation afresh. Instead, the NGT simply sustained the said order on the premise that it (NGT) was giving an opportunity of being heard to the appellant herein.

Arguments

It was the case of the appellant that the NGT ought to have remanded the matter to the Management Authority for redetermination of the environmental compensation that was liable to be paid by the appellant herein after giving an opportunity of being heard and filing objections to the said determination. It was submitted that the impugned order of the NGT be set aside, and there may be a fresh compliance of the direction issued by the High Court.

On the contrary, the Respondents submitted that it was the appellant who chose to file an appeal before the NGT and the NGT, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the appellant herein, had passed the impugned order.

Reasoning

The Bench noticed that the Authority, while determining the compensation, had neither issued any Show Cause Notice to the appellant herein nor had it given an opportunity of being heard. “...we find that the procedure adopted by the first respondent herein was contrary to the settled principles of natural justice. Further, when the said order dated 09.05.2022 was assailed by the appellant before the NGT, the NGT, having found violation of the principles of natural justice, ought to have remanded the matter to the first respondent-authority for redetermination of environmental compensation after giving an opportunity of being heard to the appellant herein”, the Bench stated.

It was further mentioned by the Bench that the NGT took upon itself to determine the correctness or otherwise of the calculation of environmental compensation arrived at by the first respondent-authority on the premise that it was giving an opportunity to the appellant herein. “Therefore, we find that the NGT was not right in sustaining the impugned order dated 09.05.2022 passed by the appellant herein”, it further held.

The Bench mentioned that since it was setting aside the order of the NGT only on the issue of violation of principles of natural justice and not on merits, the same would be construed by the first respondent-authority as a Show Cause Notice.

“Appellant herein is granted three weeks from today to reply to the said order now construed as a Show Cause Notice. The appellant shall be heard and there shall be a redetermination of the environmental compensation that has to be paid by the appellant herein having regard to the direction dated 19.04.2022 issued by the High Court in PIL Writ Petition No.2530/2021 extracted above”, it concluded.

Cause Title: ZON Hotels Pvt. Ltd. v. Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 297)

Appearance:

Appellant: Advocates Shiven Desai, Avishkar Singhvi, AOR Vivek Jain, Advocates Suchitra Kumbhat, Rajat Jain, Sadiq Noor

Respondents: Senior Advocate Sanjay Parikh, AOR Surjendu Sankar Das, Advocate Annie Mittal, AOR Srishti Agnihotri, Advocates Kritika, D.P.Singh, Tara Elizabeth Kurien

Click here to read/download Judgment












Justice BV NagarathnaJustice Prasanna B. Varale

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.