Parliamentary panel asks NGT to more proactively use powers on critical environmental concerns
A Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Law and Personnel tabled its report, "Review of Functioning of Tribunal System in the Country," in both Houses of Parliament.
The committee recommended that the National Green Tribunal (NGT) more proactively exercise its suo motu (on its own motion) powers on "critical environmental concerns" such as severe air pollution in Delhi and the Indo-Gangetic plain, illegal riverbank sand mining, river pollution, highway tree-felling and loss of roadside plantations, unregulated high-rise construction in metros, and environmentally sensitive mining.
It also recommended "stronger follow-up" by the NGT and the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) through regular action-taken reports, more effective use of joint committees, clear fixing of responsibility, and better mechanisms to ensure NGT orders are implemented promptly.
The report flags gaps between the tribunal issuing orders and their actual on-ground enforcement by state agencies and the ministry.
National Green Tribunal — origin, structure, jurisdiction
The NGT is a specialised statutory body established under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, to provide effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental protection, conservation of forests, and other natural resources, including enforcement of legal rights relating to environment. It was created in line with India's commitment under the Rio Declaration (1992) to provide judicial and administrative remedies for environmental harm, and replaced the earlier National Environment Appellate Authority.
Key Details
- Set up under the NGT Act, 2010; principal bench in New Delhi, with regional benches in Bhopal, Pune, Kolkata and Chennai.
- Composition: a Chairperson (retired Supreme Court judge or High Court Chief Justice, appointed by the Centre in consultation with the Chief Justice of India), Judicial Members (retired SC/HC judges), and Expert Members (with qualifications in science/engineering/technology and environmental experience); tenure is generally five years.
- Jurisdiction under Section 14 covers "civil cases" involving a "substantial question relating to environment" arising from the implementation of specified enactments (Water Act 1974, Air Act 1981, Environment Protection Act 1986, Forest Conservation Act 1980, Biological Diversity Act 2002, and related laws).
- Section 15 empowers the NGT to award relief, compensation and restitution of damaged environment.
- Appeals from NGT orders lie directly to the Supreme Court under Section 22.
The committee's recommendation targets exactly this suo motu jurisdiction — the power of the NGT to take up matters on its own initiative rather than waiting for a formal application, which the panel wants used more aggressively for pollution, mining and construction violations.
Suo motu jurisdiction of the NGT — the Ankita Sinha ruling
Whether the NGT could act on its own motion (without a formal application by an aggrieved party) was a contested legal question, since the NGT Act's text primarily speaks of disposing "applications" and "appeals." The Supreme Court settled this in Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Ankita Sinha (2021).
Key Details
- A three-judge Bench (Justices A.M. Khanwilkar, A.S. Bopanna/Ravikumar and Hrishikesh Roy) held on 7 October 2021 that the NGT is vested with suo motu power in the discharge of its functions under the NGT Act.
- The case arose from mismanagement at the Deonar dumping ground in Mumbai, flagged by a newspaper article rather than a formal petition.
- The Court held the NGT's suo motu jurisdiction is subject to principles of natural justice (parties must be heard) but cannot be curtailed by procedural technicalities of a "complainant" or "formal application."
This 2021 ruling is the legal foundation that allows the parliamentary committee to now ask the NGT to actually use this confirmed suo motu power more proactively on chronic, high-impact environmental issues rather than remaining reactive.
Parliamentary Standing Committees — oversight mechanism
Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committees (DRSCs) are permanent committees of Parliament that scrutinise ministries' functioning, examine bills, budgets, and specific policy issues referred to them, and table reports with recommendations that are not binding on the government but carry strong persuasive and oversight value.
Key Details
- The DRSC system was reorganised in 1993, expanding from a few committees to a comprehensive set of subject-based standing committees covering all ministries.
- Members are drawn from both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha; committees are constituted for a one-year term.
- Government is required to submit an Action Taken Report (ATR) on committee recommendations, though follow-through is not legally enforceable.
This report on the "Review of Functioning of Tribunal System in the Country" is precisely this kind of oversight product — a standing committee reviewing how well a quasi-judicial tribunal (NGT) is functioning and prescribing corrective steps for both the tribunal and the executive (MoEFCC).
- The NGT was established under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.
- The Supreme Court confirmed the NGT's suo motu powers in Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Ankita Sinha (7 October 2021).
- NGT has a principal bench (New Delhi) and four regional benches: Bhopal, Pune, Kolkata, Chennai.
- Appeals against NGT orders go directly to the Supreme Court under Section 22 of the NGT Act.
- The committee's report was titled "Review of Functioning of Tribunal System in the Country."