TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (2) TMI 1938
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1.05.2013, 08.08.2013, and 15.12.2018. The brief facts necessary to appreciate the controversy raised in the present case are as follows. 2. The Respondent, Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd./Vedanta Ltd., was operating a copper smelter plant at the State Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu Ltd. (SIPCOT) Industrial Complex at Thoothukudi, Tamil Nadu. On 01.08.1994, the Respondent received a No-Objection Certificate ["NOC"] from the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board ["TNPCB"] for the production of blister copper and sulphuric acid. The environmental clearance to the project by the Ministry of Environment, Forest, and Climate Change ["MoEF"] followed on 16.01.1995. On 17.05.1995, the State MoEF also granted environmental clearance to the Respondent. The TNPCB granted its consent under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 ["Air Act"] and Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 ["Water Act"] on 22.05.1995. After obtaining the requisite permissions, the consent to operate the plant was issued on 14.10.1996 by the TNPCB. Production commenced on 01.01.1997. However, the environmental clearances that were granted were challenged before the Madr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-cause notice dated 14.03.2017 for violations under the Air Act and the Water Act which, apparently, was not pursued. On 06.09.2017, an inspection report by the TNPCB was made, and an order passed on 07.09.2017, granting renewal of consent to operate only till 31.03.2018 subject to various conditions. Meanwhile, a protest had been organized in March 2018 by some persons against the proposed expansion sought by the Respondent. The Respondent, therefore, had to file Writ Petition No. 7313 of 2018 before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court for police protection. This Writ Petition was disposed of by an order dated 04.04.2018 with a direction to consider the Respondent's application. On 09.04.2018, the TNPCB refused renewal of consent to operate to the Respondent's unit based on non-compliance with certain conditions that were laid down under the Air Act and the Water Act. On 12.04.2018, the Respondent filed Appeal Nos. 36-37 of 2018 before the appellate authority Under Section 28 of the Water Act. In these appeals, various orders were passed, until, on 06.06.2018, the following order was passed: APPLICATIONS 28 & 29/2018, APPLICATIONS 30 & 31/2018 AND APPEALS 36 & 37....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....8, Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board has also issued directions for closure and disconnection of power supply to the Unit. The power supply has been disconnected on 24.5.2018. 2. Under Article 48-A of the Constitution, "the State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country". 3. Under Sections, 18(1)(b) of the Water Act, 1974 in the larger public interest, the Government endorse the closure direction of the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board and also direct the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board to seal the unit and close the plant permanently. 6. On the same date, the TNPCB issued a letter to the District Collector, inter alia, directing him to seal the Respondent's unit. These six orders became the subject matter of a composite Appeal No. 87 of 2018 Under Section 16 of the NGT Act. 7. A writ petition was filed by the Respondent before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on 18.06.2018 so that the Respondent could access its unit to maintain its plant. This was dismissed as withdrawn on 09.07.2018. 8. The Appellants then took up a plea of maintainability of the composite appeal. As this wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o. 44 of the Consent Order dated 19-04-2005, the Appellant should be directed to monitor ground water quality including heavy metals such as Arsenic, Cadmium, Silver, Copper, Fluoride, etc. in and around the factory premises and nearby villages once a month and such report should be furnished to the TNPCB. b) The sampling of the above should be taken in the presence of an official from TNPCB. c) In addition to the above, the sampling of effluent/emission and solid waste should also be done by a monitoring group to be constituted by TNPCB comprising a representative of the District Collector, an official of TNPCB, NGOs and academicians as per condition No. 43 of Consent Order dated 19-04-2005. d) Both the reports should be sent by TNPCB to CPCB for analysis. Recommendations made by CPCB should be followed. e) Copper slag dumped at all the eleven sites including the Uppar River should be removed. If copper slag has been used for landfill purposes, then the excess amount of the slag over and above the level of ground would be removed and thereafter the landfill should be compacted with one feet of soil, so that the copper slag is not blown away by the strong winds. f) T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d out by the Tamil Nadu State Government and TNPCB. Such reports should be furnished to NGT in a time-bound manner. o) The Appellant should be directed to start the construction of gypsum pond immediately and complete the same in a time bound manner as per the conditions laid down in the guidelines given by CPCB in October, 2014. p) The Appellant shall undertake a fresh detailed hydrogeological study for determining aquifer vulnerability and migration of leachate from the existing phosphogypsum pond through a reputed organization approved by the TNPCB as per condition No. 15 of the Consent Order dated 19/04/2005. q) Direction should be given to the TNPCB as well as to the Appellant to take independent ground water samples from the same points for the purpose of finding out groundwater pollution if any. Such reports should then be compared by the CPCB. Recommendations made by CPCB should be followed. r) Directions/Regulation may be framed for import of high grade copper ore. s) Irrespective of the norms, stack height in any case be increased in order to remove the ambiguity and the grievance of inhabitants of the people of the Tuticorin with regard to emission of SO2.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and argued that the six impugned orders before the NGT were orders which could not have been corrected by the NGT. Insofar as the first order dated 09.04.2018 was concerned, an appeal was pending before the appellate authority, as a result of which, the NGT, when it set aside the said order, could not have done so. Similarly, the orders dated 12.04.2018, 23.05.2018, and 28.05.2018, made Under Section 33A of the Water Act and Section 31A of the Air Act, were composite orders issued. As orders Under Section 31A of the Air Act were not appealable to the NGT either under the Air Act or Under Section 16 of the NGT Act, the Tribunal acted without jurisdiction in interfering with these orders. Further, the order dated 28.05.2018, issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu Under Section 18 of the Water Act, was certainly not an appealable order under either the Water Act or the NGT Act, and could only have been corrected in judicial review in a writ petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India or in a suit before a Civil Court. According to him, therefore, the setting aside of such an order was also completely without jurisdiction. Shri K.V. Viswanathan, learned Senior Advoca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ter Act, the order could be stated to be substantially an order under the Water Act, and therefore, appealable as such. He added that, in any case, such orders could be corrected Under Section 14 of the NGT Act to avoid piecemeal litigation. Further, in any case, according to the learned Senior Advocate, a direction made Under Section 31A of the Air Act is undoubtedly equivalent to an order made Under Section 31 of the Air Act, and therefore, would be expressly appealable Under Section 16 of the NGT Act. Another without prejudice argument was made, that assuming all other arguments failed, these matters are only procedural, and therefore, appeals must necessarily land up before the expert tribunal which is so constituted as an expert tribunal to deal with all matters relating to the environment. For this, he referred to and relied strongly upon Sections 14, 15, 29, and 33 of the NGT Act. Insofar as the attack made upon the order dated 28.05.2018 of the Government of Tamil Nadu Under Section 18 of the Water Act is concerned, Shri Sundaram argued that on a proper construction of Section 18 read with the other provisions of the Water Act, only a general order, dealing with general mat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Board, the matter shall be referred to the Central Government for its decision. xxx xxx xxx 25. Restrictions on new outlets and new discharges. -- (1) Subject to the provisions of this section, no person shall, without the previous consent of the State Board,-- (a) establish or take any steps to establish any industry, operation or process, or any treatment and disposal system or any extension or addition thereto, which is likely to discharge sewage or trade effluent into a stream or well or sewer or on land (such discharge being hereafter in this Section referred to as discharge of sewage); or (b) bring into use any new or altered outlet for the discharge of sewage; or (c) begin to make any new discharge of sewage: Provided that a person in the process of taking any steps to establish any industry, operation or process immediately before the commencement of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Amendment Act, 1988, for which no consent was necessary prior to such commencement, may continue to do so for a period of three months from such commencement or, if he has made an application for such consent, within the said period of three months, till the disp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gister as relates to any outlet, or to any effluent, from any land or premises shall be open to inspection at all reasonable hours by any person interested in, or affected by such outlet, land or premises, as the case may be, or by any person authorised by him in this behalf and the conditions so contained in such register shall be conclusive proof that the consent was granted subject to such conditions. (7) The consent referred to in Sub-section (1) shall, unless given or refused earlier, be deemed to have been given unconditionally on the expiry of a period of four months of the making of an application in this behalf complete in all respects to the State Board. (8) For the purposes of this Section and Sections 27 and 30,-- (a) the expression "new or altered outlet" means any outlet which is wholly or partly constructed on or after the commencement of this Act or which (whether so constructed or not) is substantially altered after such commencement; (b) the expression "new discharge" means a discharge which is not, as respects the nature and composition, temperature, volume, and rate of discharge of the effluent substantially a continuation of a discharge made within ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... order is communicated to him, prefer an appeal to such authority (hereinafter referred to as the appellate authority) as the State Government may think fit to constitute: Provided that the appellate authority may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if such authority is satisfied that the Appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time. (2) An appellate authority shall consist of a single person or three persons, as the State Government may think fit, to be appointed by that Government. (3) The form and manner in which an appeal may be preferred Under Sub-section (1), the fees payable for such appeal and the procedure to be followed by the appellate authority shall be such as may be prescribed. (4) On receipt of an appeal preferred Under Sub-section (1), the appellate authority shall, after giving the Appellant and the State Board an opportunity of being heard, dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible. (5) If the appellate authority determines that any condition imposed, or the variation of any condition, as the case may be, was unreasonable, then,-- (a) where the appeal is in respect of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l Green Tribunal Act, 2010; or (b) an order passed by the State Government Under Section 29, on or after the commencement of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010; or (c) directions issued Under Section 33-A by a Board, on or after the commencement of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, may file an appeal to the National Green Tribunal established Under Section 3 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, in accordance with the provisions of that Act. 16. The relevant Sections of the Air Act are as follows: 21. Restrictions on use of certain industrial plants.--(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, no person shall, without the previous consent of the State Board, establish or operate any industrial plant in an air pollution control area: Provided that a person operating any industrial plant in any air pollution control area immediately before the commencement of Section 9 of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Amendment Act, 1987, for which no consent was necessary prior to such commencement, may continue to do so for a period of three months from such commencement or, if he has made an application for such consent within the said period of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or Clause (ii) shall be kept at all times in good running condition; (iv) chimney, wherever necessary, of such specifications as the State Board may approve in this behalf shall be erected or re-erected in such premises; (v) such other conditions as the State Board may specify in this behalf; and (vi) the conditions referred to in Clauses (i), (ii) and (iv) shall be complied with within such period as the State Board may specify in this behalf: Provided that in the case of a person operating any industrial plant in an air pollution control area immediately before the date of declaration of such area as an air pollution control area, the period so specified shall not be less than six months: Provided further that-- (a) after the installation of any control equipment in accordance with the specifications under Clause (i), or (b) after the alteration or replacement of any control equipment in accordance with the directions of the State Board under Clause (ii), or (c) after the erection or re-erection of any chimney under Clause (iv), no control equipment or chimney shall be altered or replaced or, as the case may be, erected or re-erected except with the pri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n, officer or authority, and such person, officer or authority shall be bound to comply with such directions. Explanation.--For the avoidance of doubts, it is hereby declared that the power to issue directions under this Section includes the power to direct-- (a) the closure, prohibition or Regulation of any industry, operation or process; or (b) the stoppage or Regulation of supply of electricity, water or any other service. 31B. Appeal to National Green Tribunal.--Any person aggrieved by an order or decision of the Appellate Authority Under Section 31, made on or after the commencement of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, may file an appeal to the National Green Tribunal established Under Section 3 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, in accordance with the provisions of that Act. 17. The relevant Sections of the NGT Act are as follows: 2. Definitions.--(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,-- xxx xxx xxx (m) "substantial question relating to environment" shall include an instance where,-- (i) there is a direct violation of a specific statutory environmental obligation by a person by which,-- (A) the community at large othe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t cause from filing the application within the said period, allow it to be filed within a further period not exceeding sixty days. (4) The Tribunal may, having regard to the damage to public health, property and environment, divide the compensation or relief payable under separate heads specified in Schedule II so as to provide compensation or relief to the claimants and for restitution of the damaged property or environment, as it may think fit. (5) Every claimant of the compensation or relief under this Act shall intimate to the Tribunal about the application filed to, or, as the case may be, compensation or relief received from, any other court or authority. 16. Tribunal to have appellate jurisdiction.--Any person aggrieved by,-- (a) an order or decision, made, on or after the commencement of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, by the appellate authority Under Section 28 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (6 of 1974); (b) an order passed, on or after the commencement of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, by the State Government Under Section 29 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (6 of 1974); (c) directi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....from the date of establishment of the Tribunal under this Act, no civil court shall have jurisdiction to entertain any appeal in respect of any matter, which the Tribunal is empowered to determine under its appellate jurisdiction. (2) No civil court shall have jurisdiction to settle dispute or entertain any question relating to any claim for granting any relief or compensation or restitution of property damaged or environment damaged which may be adjudicated upon by the Tribunal, and no injunction in respect of any action taken or to be taken by or before the Tribunal in respect of the settlement of such dispute or any such claim for granting any relief or compensation or restitution of property damaged or environment damaged shall be granted by the civil court." xxx xxx xxx 33. Act to have overriding effect. -- The provisions of this Act, shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent contained in any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act. 18. It is important now to advert to both the orders dated 08.08.2013 and 15.12.2018, insofar as they deal with the maintainability of the appeals b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....its wisdom and direct the statutory authority to act in a particular manner. Firstly this judgment on facts and law has no application to the present case. Secondly, the non-constitution of the authority itself would bring the present case outside the application of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Manohar Lal (supra). 63. We are unable to contribute ourselves to the contention raised that a direction passed Under Section 31A of the Air Act is not covered under the expression 'order' used in Section 31 of the Air Act. Any direction essentially would contain an element of order as it requires and calls upon the parties to comply with the same. 'Direction' itself means an order; an instruction how to proceed, like the judge's direction to the jury, while 'Order' is defined as a command, direction or instruction. This is how the Black's Law Dictionary, 9th Edition, refers to these two expressions. In other words, they can be used as synonyms. They are not conflicting terms and one can be read into the other. Thus, we find no substance in this contention raised on behalf of the Respondents. 64. An appellate authority, which is const....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the TNPCB. 46. The judgments relied upon by the Respondents are distinguishable. Unlike Educanti Kistamma v. Deokar's Distillery [(2003) 5 SCC 669], this is not a case where the first order has not been challenged. Challenge before us is to the first order as well as subsequent orders. Basis for all the orders is common. xxx xxx xxx 48. The order of the Government of Tamil Nadu issued Under Section 18(1)(b) of the Water Act also cannot be said to be an independent order but relied on and endorsing the views of the TNPCB which is under challenge and that are not sufficient for ordering closure or refusal to grant even consent. If there are no other materials for the Government of Tamil Nadu to arrive at conclusion of closure on the ground of irreversible pollution being caused to the environment allowing the unit to function, then it cannot be said to be a policy decision to close down the industry permanently and if any order was passed based on the order by the Pollution Control Board, without independent application of mind and arbitrarily, then that can also be incidentally considered by the Tribunal for the purpose of deciding the question of legality of that orde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uous in view of the fact that the NGT had passed its order on 15.12.2018 in which it had set aside the order dated 09.04.2018. 23. What becomes clear from the above narration of facts is the fact that while an appeal was still pending before the appellate authority, the NGT took up a matter directly against the original order dated 09.04.2018 which was challenged before the appellate authority even before the appellate authority could decide the same. However, Shri Sundaram referred to Section 28(4) of the Air Act and Section 31(4) of the Water Act to argue that appeals to the appellate authority must be decided expeditiously, and if they were not so decided, an appeal would lie to the NGT against a decision by the appellate authority not to decide the matter before it expeditiously. This argument must also be negatived as, in point of fact, no appeal was preferred from any orders of the appellate authority adjourning the proceedings. As we have seen, an appeal was directly filed from the order of the TNPCB dated 09.04.2018. 24. At this point, it is important to advert to a few judgments of this Court. In Kundur Rudrappa v. Mysore Revenue Appellate Tribunal and Ors., (1975) 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gment of Sinha, J., in Cellular Operators Association of India and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., (2003) 3 SCC 186, the learned Judge observed: 27. TDSAT was required to exercise its jurisdiction in terms of Section 14-A of the Act. TDSAT itself is an expert body and its jurisdiction is wide having regard to Sub-section (7) of Section 14-A thereof. Its jurisdiction extends to examining the legality, propriety or correctness of a direction/order or decision of the authority in terms of Sub-section (2) of Section 14 as also the dispute made in an application Under Sub-section (1) thereof. The approach of the learned TDSAT, being on the premise that its jurisdiction is limited or akin to the power of judicial review is, therefore, wholly unsustainable. The extent of jurisdiction of a court or a tribunal depends upon the relevant statute. TDSAT is a creature of a statute. Its jurisdiction is also conferred by a statute. The purpose of creation of TDSAT has expressly been stated by Parliament in the amending Act of 2000. TDSAT, thus, failed to take into consideration the amplitude of its jurisdiction and thus misdirected itself in law. 26. In B. Himmatlal Agrawal v. Competition ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ution primarily a court exercising appellate jurisdiction: it is competent to exercise original jurisdiction only in those matters in respect of which by special Acts it has been specifically invested with jurisdiction. The High Court is competent to exercise original jurisdiction Under Section 105 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act 43 of 1958 if it is invested with the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of a District Court, and not otherwise, and the High Court of Mysore not being invested by any statute of under its constitution with that jurisdiction was incompetent to entertain a passing off action. But it was urged that in a State the High Court is at the apex of the hierarchy of civil courts and has all the powers which the subordinate courts may exercise, and it is competent to entertain all actions as a Court of original jurisdiction which may lie in any court in the State. For this exalted claim, there is no warrant in our jurisprudence. Jurisdiction of a court means the extent of the authority of a court to administer justice prescribed with reference to the subject-matter, pecuniary value and local limits. Barring cases in which jurisdiction is expressly conferr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1) was clearly incompetent. It may be added that the Union of India could have used the mode set out in Section 129-D, but it did not do so. 29. In Manohar Lal v. Ugrasen, (2010) 11 SCC 557, one of the questions involved, Under Sub-paragraph 2(a) of the judgment, was as follows: 2. In these appeals, three substantial questions of law for consideration of this Court are involved. They are, namely: (a) As to whether the State Government, a revisional authority under the statute, could take upon itself the task of a lower statutory authority? xxx xxx xxx After reviewing a number of cases, this Court then concluded: 23. Therefore, the law on the question can be summarised to the effect that no higher authority in the hierarchy or an appellate or revisional authority can exercise the power of the statutory authority nor can the superior authority mortgage its wisdom and direct the statutory authority to act in a particular manner. If the appellate or revisional authority takes upon itself the task of the statutory authority and passes an order, it remains unenforceable for the reason that it cannot be termed to be an order passed under the Act. 30. In Arcot Textile ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion 7-A. However, if an independent order is passed Under Section 7-Q for interest alone, the same was held to be not appealable. 31. From the above authorities, it is clear that an appeal is a creature of statute and an appellate tribunal has to act strictly within the domain prescribed by statute. It is obvious that an appeal would lie from an order or decision of the appellate authority Under Section 28 of the Water Act to the NGT only Under Section 33B(a) of the Water Act read with Section 16(a) of the NGT Act. Similarly, an appeal would lie from an order or decision of the appellate authority Under Section 31 of the Air Act to the NGT only Under Section 31B of the Air Act read with Section 16(f) of the NGT Act. Obviously, since no order or decision had been made by the appellate authority under either the Water Act or the Air Act, any direct appeal against an original order to the NGT would be incompetent. NGT's jurisdiction being strictly circumscribed by Section 33B of the Water Act, read with Section 31B of the Air Act, read with Section 16(a) and (f) of the NGT Act, would make it clear that it is only orders or decisions of the appellate authority that are appealabl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the Court of Appeal or of the Supreme Court in previous proceedings, and was fully considered in the judgments given by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court (as the case may be) in those previous proceedings. xxx xxx xxx 33. To similar effect are Sections of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act, 2007, and the Employment Tribunals Act, 1996. Such appeals in the U.K. are referred to as "leapfrog appeals" [see S Franses Ltd. v. The Cavendish Hotel (London) Ltd., [2018] UKSC 62 (at paragraph 7)]. 34. It is, therefore, clear that no such provisions, as are contained in the U.K. Acts, being present in any of the Acts that we are concerned with, such leapfrog appeals to the NGT would necessarily be without jurisdiction. (II) Re: Orders passed Under Section 33A of the Water Act and Section 31A of the Air Act 35. We have referred to the orders dated 12.04.2018, 23.05.2018, and 28.05.2018 passed by the TNPCB Under Sections 33A and 31A of the Water Act and Air Act respectively. At this juncture, it is important to state that Section 33B of the Water Act and Section 31B of the Air Act were both enacted on 18.10.2010, which is the very date on which the NGT Act came in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....foresaid, makes it clear that even this argument must be rejected. Also, "directions" that are issued Under Section 31A of the Air Act are of a different quality from "orders" referred to in Section 31 of the same Act. Directions are issued in the exercise of powers and performance of functions under the Act and are not quasi-judicial in nature, whereas orders that are appealed against Under Section 31 are quasi-judicial orders made, inter alia, Under Section 21 of the Air Act. For this reason also, we cannot accept the aforesaid argument of Shri Sundaram. However, Shri Sundaram argued, with particular reference to the explanation to Section 31A of the Air Act that "directions" partake of the nature of "orders" when closure of any particular industry or stoppage of supply of electricity qua any single industry is made, and therefore, such directions are appealable as orders Under Section 31 of the Air Act. This argument is also of no avail as Section 33A of the Water Act contains an identical explanation to that contained in Section 31A of the Air Act. Despite this, the legislative scheme, as stated hereinabove, is that so far as directions under the Water Act are concerned, they a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the right of appeal is a statutory right, and like all other statutory rights, it can be waived, unless its waiver is detrimental to public interest. The question in these appeals is not whether an Appellant may waive a statutory right of appeal. The question is whether the NGT, which is only invested with the jurisdiction of entertaining an appeal from an order of an appellate authority, is jurisdictionally capable of entertaining an appeal directly from the original authority. It is clear, as has been held by us, that the NGT possesses no such jurisdiction. 38. One further argument was made that these matters are only procedural, and therefore, substantially, an appeal to the NGT would be maintainable. It is well settled that the right to appeal is not a procedural matter but a substantive one. In Garikapati Veeraya v. N. Subbiah Choudhury, 1957 SCR 488, this Court held: From the decisions cited above the following principles clearly emerge: (i) That the legal pursuit of a remedy, suit, appeal and second appeal are really but steps in a series of proceedings all connected by an intrinsic unity and are to be regarded as one legal proceeding. (ii) The right of app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rashtra, (2007) 5 SCC 211 (at page 225); Krishnadevi Malchand Kamathia v. Bombay Environmental Action Group, (2011) 3 SCC 363 (at page 369); and Kandla Port v. Hargovind Jasraj, (2013) 3 SCC 182 (at page 193). Therefore, this order can only be set aside either in a suit, or by the High Court in the exercise of judicial review. Faced with this, Shri Sundaram then argued that though the said order states that it is traceable to Section 18 of the Water Act, it can, in fact, be traced to Section 29 of the same Act. Section 29 deals with the revisional power, in which the State Government is to pass a quasi-judicial order after hearing both the State Board and the person who is affected. Quite obviously, this order is not a quasi-judicial order as the State Government has not found it necessary to hear either the State Board, or any person affected by such order. Further, such order does not purport to be an order which either affirms or sets aside any order made Under Sections 25, 26, or 27 of the Water Act. This argument of despair, therefore, must also be rejected. 40. Shri Sundaram then argued that this Court in L. Chandra Kumar (supra) made it clear that Tribunals that are set u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rson appointed to any service or post referred to in Sub-clause (ii) or Sub-clause (iii) of Clause (b), being a person whose services have been placed by a State Government or any local or other authority or any corporation or society or other body, at the disposal of the Central Government for such appointment. Explanation.--For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that references to "Union" in this Sub-section shall be construed as including references also to a Union Territory. (2) The Central Government may, by notification, apply with effect from such date as may be specified in the notification the provisions of Sub-section (3) to local or other authorities within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India and to corporations or societies owned or controlled by Government, not being a local or other authority or corporation or society controlled or owned by a State Government: Provided that if the Central Government considers it expedient so to do for the purpose of facilitating transition to the scheme as envisaged by this Act, different dates may be so specified under this Sub-section in respect of different classes of, or differ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntrasted with a conjoint reading of Section 14 and Section 28 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. 41. It is in the context of Article 323A and the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 that this Court in L. Chandra Kumar (supra) has observed in paragraph 93 as follows: 93. Before moving on to other aspects, we may summarise our conclusions on the jurisdictional powers of these Tribunals. The Tribunals are competent to hear matters where the vires of statutory provisions are questioned. However, in discharging this duty, they cannot act as substitutes for the High Courts and the Supreme Court which have, under our constitutional set-up, been specifically entrusted with such an obligation. Their function in this respect is only supplementary and all such decisions of the Tribunals will be subject to scrutiny before a Division Bench of the respective High Courts. The Tribunals will consequently also have the power to test the vires of subordinate legislations and rules. However, this power of the Tribunals will be subject to one important exception. The Tribunals shall not entertain any question regarding the vires of their parent statutes following the settled principle tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....deal with the appeal from the stage which was reached before such transfer or from any earlier stage or de novo as considered appropriate by it. Since the High Court while hearing appeal did not have the power of judicial review of subordinate legislation, the transferee adjudicatory forum i.e. TDSAT cannot exercise that power Under Section 14(b). xxx xxx xxx 114. ... From the above-extracted portion of the order it is evident that the Bench, which decided the matter, felt that the view taken by TDSAT would encourage rampant violation of the orders without any penal consequence and the entire scheme of the TRAI Act would become unworkable. The word "directions" used in Section 29 of the TRAI Act was interpreted to include orders and Regulations in the context of the factual matrix of that case and the apprehension of the Court that Section 29 would otherwise become unworkable, but the same cannot be read as laying down a proposition of law that the words "direction", "decision" or "order" used in Section 14(b) would include Regulations framed Under Section 36, which are in the nature of subordinate legislation. xxx xxx xxx 123. In Union of India v. Madras Bar Assn. [(20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the face of the proceedings that the particular matter is within the cognizance of the particular court [Halsbury's Laws of England, vol. 9, p. 349]. (at page 499) For this reason also, we are of the view that the State Government order made Under Section 18 of the Water Act, not being the subject matter of any appeal Under Section 16 of the NGT Act, cannot be "judicially reviewed" by the NGT. Following the judgment in BSNL (supra), we are of the view that the NGT has no general power of judicial review akin to that vested Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India possessed by the High Courts of this country. Shri Sundaram's strong reliance on the NGT judgment dated 17.07.2014 in Wilfred v. Ministry of Environment and Forests must also be rejected as this NGT judgment does not state the law on this aspect correctly. This contention is also without merit, and therefore, rejected. 43. Shri Sundaram then argued that, in any case, this order is an order made by the State Government against the TNPCB, and is therefore, a direction to the TNPCB and not a direction to his client. If this were so, and the order had no effect on his client, there would have been no ne....