NGT Has No Power To Set Aside State Pollution Control Board Appointments, Centre Tells SC

Additional Solicitors-General, P.S.Narasimha and Tushar Mehta told the Supreme Court bench of Justices Madan B Lokur and Deepak Gupta on August 16, that the National Green Tribunal’s June 8 order directing the chairpersons of 10 State Pollution Control Boards to cease functioning, is legally unsound.  The NGT had directed them to quit, as their appointments did not comply with its August 2016 judgment in Rajendra Singh Bhandari v State of Uttarakhand and others.  The NGT laid down guidelines to ensure that the qualifications of SPCB personnel are in consonance with the letter and spirit of the law.

According to the NGT’s August 2016 judgment in this case, the chairperson of the    SPCB should have special knowledge or practical experience in respect of matters relating to environmental protection.  The member secretaries of SGPCs, therefore, must possess qualification, knowledge, and experience of scientific, engineering and management aspects of pollution control, and must be appointed on a full-time basis, the NGT had held in that case.

According to the NGT, only those with an academic qualification in the field of environmental protection from a recognized university would be eligible to appointed to the SPCBs.  The NGT’s guidelines sought to ensure security of tenure of the SPCB members.

On July 10, the Supreme Court stayed further proceedings in the NGT in the case, and agreed to hear the appeals from the States and the Centre.  The 10 SPCBs, whose chairpersons were told to quit by the NGT, are those of Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Uttarakhand, Kerala, Rajasthan, Telengana, Haryana, Maharashtra and Manipur.

Making his submissions, Narasimha contended that the NGT confused institutional  experience with professional degrees. Tushar Mehta argued that the NGT ignored grassroots environmental activists like M.C.Mehta, who don’t have academic qualifications, but are eminently suitable to be appointed to the SPCBs.

Contending that the NGT can’t amend the NGT Act, 2010, which created it, Mehta said the Act details the method of employing the personnel of the PCBs.  When the Act says personnel can be nominated, the NGT cannot say nominations must be made through advertisements.  Nominations are essentially made under the doctrine of pleasure, he suggested.

Narasimha explained that the NGT can deal only with substantial question of law concerning environment. “The composition of SPCBs is a service matter”, he told the SC bench.

The lead appeal in this case has been filed by Techi Tagi Tara, Chairman Arunachal Pradaesh State Pollution Control Board.  Since Bhandari, Respondent No.1, was not present, the case has been adjourned to August 21.  The Court has indicated that if no one appears on behalf of Respondent No.1 on that day, it will proceed to pronounce orders.