CRITICAL REVIEW OF NATIONAL GREEN

TRIBUNAL, 2010
 INTRODUCTION
The species, Homo sapiens (human beings) appeared late in
the Earth’s history. Nevertheless, they were able to modify
the Earth’s environment as a result of their activities. The
early human beings lived in harmony with the environment.
It was only when the human population started increasing
and technology improved and expanded that the various
kinds of population related to the environment arose. In the
developing country like India increasing need for food and
firewood has resulted in deforestation and cultivation of
steep slopes, causing severe erosion. The ozone layer that
shields us from the sun’s harmful ultraviolet rays is being
damaged by the increasing use of industrial chemicals called
the chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) that are extensively used in
refrigerators, air conditioning, cleaning solvents, packing
materials and aerosol sprays.
The more people there are in an urban area, the more the
cities tend to sprawl and thus, there is an increase in the use
of vehicles. Vehicle exhausts release a mixture of chemicals
including carbon monoxide, sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides
and hydrocarbons that adversely affects the environment.
The Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) of the
Government of India maintains records of atmospheric
pollution levels in many cities around the country. These data
show that in many cities, air pollution reaches unacceptable
levels on several days of the year. The World Health
Organization has classified Delhi as one of the ten most
polluted cities in the world. Largely the industrial, agricultural
and domestic activities are responsible for deteriorating the
environmental quality. Thus, proper enforcement of
regulatory measures is required for deteriorating the
environmental quality.
The National Green Tribunal (NGT), established in 2010,
represents a significant development in India's
environmental governance framework. Created under the
National Green Tribunal Act, the NGT aims to provide an
effective and efficient mechanism for the resolution of
disputes related to environmental protection and
conservation of forests and other natural resources. With the
objective of expediting the adjudication of environmental
matters, the tribunal serves as a specialized forum that
combines judicial and quasi-judicial functions, addressing a
wide range of issues from pollution control to biodiversity
conservation. This critical review examines the NGT’s role in
enhancing environmental jurisprudence in India, evaluating
its effectiveness, challenges, and impact on sustainable
development and public participation in environmental
decision-making. Through this analysis, we aim to highlight
both the achievements and shortcomings of the tribunal,
assessing its contribution to the broader environmental
governance landscape in the country.
In India’s history, there was not one particular court or
tribunal in place to address environmental issues. The
National Green Tribunal Act was passed on 18th October
20101 which assures the citizens of India, the right to a
healthy environment which comes under Article 21 of the
Indian Constitution2. The Act provides for the establishment
of a National Green Tribunal for the effective and expeditious
disposal of cases relating to environmental protection and
conservation of forests and other natural resources including
enforcement of any legal right relating to environment and
giving relief and compensation for damages to persons and
property and for matters connected therewith or incidental
thereto. By the coming of this Act National Environment
Tribunal Act (NETA) 19953 and National Environment
Appellate Authority (NEAA) 1997 has ceased to exist.
The tribunal shall have five benches located at different
regions4. New Delhi is the Principal Place of Sitting of the
 Tribunal and Bhopal, Pune, Kolkata and Chennai shall be the
other four place of sitting of the Tribunal. The Tribunal shall
consist of a full time chairperson, not less than ten but
subject to a maximum of twenty full time judicial members
as and not less than ten but subject to a maximum of twenty
full time Expert Members.
Anybody and everybody can approach the NGT for civil
damages arising out of non-implementation of various laws
relating to the environment such as laws on air and water
pollution, the Environment Protection Act 1972, the Forest
Conservation Act and the Biodiversity Act. The Tribunal's
dedicated jurisdiction in environmental matters shall provide
speedy environmental justice and help reduce the burden of
litigation in the higher courts. The Tribunal shall not be bound
by the procedure laid down under the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908. The Act also ordains that no civil court shall
be allowed to entertain cases which Tribunal is competent to
hear.5 It shall be guided by principles of natural justice. 6 The
Tribunal is mandated to make and endeavor for disposal of
applications or appeals finally within 6 months of filing of the
same.

 ORIGIN:
 There lies many reasons behind the setting up of this
tribunal. After India's move with Carbon credits, such tribunal
may play a vital role in ensuring the control of emissions and
maintaining the desired levels. This is the first body of its
kind that is required by its parent statute to apply the
"polluter pays" principle and the principle of sustainable
development. The NGT Act has resulted in the repeal of the
National Environment Tribunal Act (1995) as well as the
National Environment Appellate Authority Act (1997). NETA
was never brought into force and the NEAA’s failure could be
attributed to the slackness and indifference shown by the
administrative machinery.
 The National Green Tribunal (NGT) Act of 2010 was a
landmark step in India's environmental jurisprudence, setting
up a specialized tribunal to handle cases related to
environmental protection and conservation of forests.
Established to ensure a speedy and effective resolution of
environmental disputes, the NGT has since played a crucial
role in addressing issues such as air and water pollution,
forest conservation, and waste management. However, while
its establishment has brought much-needed focus and
urgency to environmental issues, the NGT's role and
functioning have not been without criticism.
 One key critique of the NGT is its limited jurisdiction.
Although the tribunal was intended to be comprehensive in
scope, it can only adjudicate matters under specific statutes,
such as the Water Act, Air Act, and the Environment
(Protection) Act, leaving out crucial legislation like the
Wildlife Protection Act. This limitation constrains its ability to
address the full spectrum of environmental concerns.
Additionally, the tribunal’s orders often face implementation
challenges, as enforcement relies on state and local agencies
with varying levels of capability and political will. Many of its
rulings have been ignored or poorly executed due to lack of
coordination with these agencies.
 The origin of the NGT can be traced back to the rising
environmental consciousness and the realization that
existing legal mechanisms were insufficient to handle the
growing number and complexity of environmental cases. The
Supreme Court of India, in various judgments, emphasized
the need for a specialized body to address environmental
litigation expeditiously and effectively. Consequently, the
National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 was passed,
establishing the NGT as a statutory body with the power to
handle civil cases related to environmental protection and
conservation. Modeled on similar tribunals in countries like
Australia and New Zealand, the NGT was envisioned as a
"fast-track court" for environmental issues, capable of
 offering expert opinions and balancing environmental
concerns with developmental needs.
 The primary objectives of the NGT include addressing cases
related to pollution, deforestation, and hazardous waste
handling, among others. The tribunal’s power to issue fines,
mandate rehabilitation, and set aside or review projects has
helped protect sensitive ecosystems and maintain public
health standards. Moreover, the NGT has been instrumental
in pushing the government to adhere to environmental
norms and international commitments, such as those under
the Paris Agreement. The establishment of the NGT
represents a shift from a passive to an active approach
toward environmental protection, illustrating India’s
commitment to environmental justice and sustainable
development.
 Another critical point is the question of its judicial
independence. Initially, the NGT was praised for its
independence as a quasi-judicial body free from direct
political influence. However, concerns have grown around
potential executive interference, especially since the
appointments to the tribunal’s benches are made by the
central government. This selection process has led some to
question whether the NGT can act impartially, particularly
when its rulings are at odds with major development projects
championed by the government.
 The effectiveness of the NGT has also been questioned due
to resource and staffing constraints. Despite the complex
and growing volume of cases, the NGT often operates with
fewer judges than needed, causing delays and backlog. This
issue is compounded by the lack of adequate technical and
environmental experts, which are essential for making
scientifically sound judgments.
 In conclusion, while the NGT has brought attention and
urgency to environmental governance in India, its
effectiveness is limited by jurisdictional constraints,
enforcement issues, concerns over judicial independence,
and resource limitations. Addressing these weaknesses is
 crucial if the NGT is to fulfil its mandate as an effective
guardian of India’s environment in the face of rapid industrial

 RIO DELARATION:
 The Rio de Janeiro summit of United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development held in June 1992, India
vowed the participating states to provide judicial and
administrative remedies for the victims of the pollutants and
other environmental damage. Some principles were laid
down in the Rio de Janeiro summit that was incorporated in
the National Green Tribunal Act 2010.
 The first clause of principle10 of the Rio Declaration is that:
“Environmental issues are best handled with participation of
all concerned citizens, at the relevant level. “The Green
Tribunal Act addresses this by defining many categories of a
“person” who would have access to the courts. “Persons”
include
(i) an individual,
(ii) a Hindu undivided family,
(iii) a company,
(iv) a firm,
(v) an association of persons or a body of individuals,
whether incorporated or not
(vi) trustee of a trust and
(vii) every artificial judicial person.
 The second clause of principle 10 of the Rio Declaration is
that at the national level, each individual shall have
appropriate access to information concerning the
environment that is held by public authorities, including
information on hazardous materials and activities in their
communities and the opportunity to participate in the
decision-making process. The Green Tribunal Act does
provide procedures and details on how one can participate in
the decision-making process. Section 16 of the National
Green Tribunal provides that :any person aggrieved by
various sections of the National Green Tribunal Act and other
laws may within a period of thirty days from the date on
 which the order or decision or direction or determination is
communicated to him, prefer an appeal to the tribunal
provided that the tribunal may, if it is satisfied that the
appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing within
the said period, allow it to be filed under this section not
exceeding sixty days.
 The third clause of Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration is that
“States shall facilitate and encourage public awareness and
participation by making information widely available.” The
Act clearly identifies ways in which the public can participate
by way of how they can bring a case to the Tribunal and how
they can work through the system in creative ways if
necessary.
 The fourth clause of Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration states
that, “Effective access to judicial and administrative
proceedings, including redress and remedy shall be
provided.” This subsection of the Rio Declaration is definitely
satisfied by the passage of this act. The Tribunal may by an
order provide
(a) for relief and compensation to the victims of pollution
and other environmental damage arising under the
enactments specified in Schedule I (including accident
occurring while handling any hazardous substance);
(b) for restitution of property damaged; and
(c) restitution of the environment for such area or areas,
as the Tribunal may think fit.
 However, in our point of view the principles of the Rio
Declaration in its totality have not been fully incorporated in
the Act. In relation to the first clause of Principle 10 of the Rio
declaration, on the surface, this legislation seems to enhance
access to justice by defining six different sub-categories of
the term “person.” On the other hand, the access to justice
seems to be limited since part (ii) of the definition of a
person states that a Hindu undivided family qualifies as a
person.
 If this section limits standing exclusively to Hindus as
opposed to members of all of the other religions in India,
then it would be quite limiting. Also, the term “undivided
family” is not defined. Since the definition includes a sub-
category for individuals, it appears that individuals are
included. However, it is not certain as to whether unmarried
couples living together (although rare) or divorced couples or
couples in mixed marriages qualify. It would also be helpful
to know what is meant by an association of persons and by
artificial judicial persons.
 Similarly in relation to the second clause of principle 10 of
Rio Declaration, the act does not appear to have any
language included within it that relates to access to
information held by the public authorities. Third clause of
principle 10 of Rio Declaration similar to the case with regard
to the second clause of Principle 10, there seems to be
missing from the legislation any reference to access to
information. On the other hand we also believe that the
prong of access to justice in environmental matters is also
satisfied since the decision-makers will be knowledgeable
with these matters and highly trained in such a way that
decisions rendered will be fair and decided by experts in the
field. Like every other act this act also has its pros and cons.

 ROLE OF JUDICIARY: WHAT WE HAVE DONE

 The most important factor that we must consider when
analyzing environmental acts creating environmental
tribunals is that of the rationale which led to the creation of
the environmental tribunal. There is a history of quest for
environmental courts in India. Every citizen is entrusted with
a duty to protect the environment by the 42 nd Amendment
1976.
 The purpose of the amendment was to ensure that the State
and citizens are guided by environmental considerations
when pursuing any activity. Justice P.N. Bhagwati, argued
that, in a developing country such as India, the modern
 judiciary cannot afford to hide behind notions of legal justice
and plead incapacity when social justice issues are
addressed to it. The interpretation of the right to life took a
major turn when in 1985 the Supreme Court was faced with
adjudging a conflict which set environmental protection
issues against industrialization in the Doon Valley case. This
case involved a large number of lessees of limestone
quarries; the Court ordered the closure of all but eight of the
quarries. The Court took notice of the fact that limestone
quarrying and excavations of the limestone deposit affect the
perennial water springs.
 Taking a serious view of this environmental disturbance, the
Court recognized that the right to life includes the right to a
wholesome environment. In 1987, the Supreme Court laid
down not only principles of strict liability in the matter of an
injury caused by the use of hazardous substances in M.C.
Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak case), but also for
the first time, mentioned setting up specialized environment
courts. The Court tacitly recognized that citizens’ right to life
was adversely affected by the leakage of oleum gas from the
premises of Shriram Foods and Fertilizers Ltd.
 The Supreme Court further advocated the establishment of
specialized environment courts. The demand for specialized
environmental courts from the judiciary reached a crescendo
with the 1998 decision of the Supreme Court in A.P. Pollution
Control Board v. Prof. M.V. Nayadu, wherein the Supreme
Court acknowledged that both it, as well as the High Courts,
was experiencing considerable difficulty in adjudicating upon
the correctness of technological and scientific opinions.
 The Court, reiterating its suggestion in earlier cases, opined
that ‚of paramount importance was the need to establish
environmental courts, authorities and tribunals for providing
adequate judicial and scientific inputs rather than leaving
such complicated disputes to be decided by officers drawn
from the executive. Thus, it can be said that the emergence
of public interest litigation, as well as the ‚activist‛ approach
of the higher judiciary, especially the Supreme Court in India,
 has provided an important tool for the enforcement of the
fundamental right to environmental protection.
 While clarifying its role, the apex court has often asserted its
goal is simply to uphold the constitution and ensure the
statutory rights of citizens. Based on the foregoing, the Law
Commission of India in 2003 proposed a structure in which
environmental courts could be established at the state level
with flexibility to have one court for more than one state.
 The 186th Report of the Law Commission summarized the
major recommendations relating to the composition, powers
and procedures of the proposed courts. The effort, with the
initial suggestion of the Supreme Court in the five judge
Constitution Bench judgment in the Delhi Oleum Gas
Leakage case (1986), has spanned almost twenty-five years
and has been subject to twists and turns, as well as half-
hearted efforts such as the National Environment Tribunal Act
(NETA) (1995) and the National Environmental Appellate
Authority Act (NEAA) (1997). It finally culminated in the
relatively progressive step of the National Green Tribunal Act
(NGT Act) (2010) that received assent of the President of
India on June 2, 2010, and was quickly notified.

 FRAMEWORK
 Passage Of the Bill: The National Green Tribunal Bill, 2009
aims to set up specialized environmental courts in the
country. It will hear initial complaints as well as appeals from
decisions of authorities under various environmental laws.
The Tribunal shall consist of both judicial and expert
members. Expert members have to possess technical
qualifications and expertise, and also practical experience.
The Tribunal shall hear only ‘substantial question relating to
the environment’. Substantial questions are those which (a)
affect the community at large, and not just individuals or
groups of individuals, or (b) cause significant damage to the
environment and property, or (c) cause harm to public health
which is broadly measurable.
 The Judicial Remedy under the Act: The Act provides for
various kinds of relief. It says that the Tribunal may, by an
order, provide relief and compensation to the victims of
pollution and other environmental damage arising under the
enactments specified in the Schedule-I to the Act, including
accident occurring while handling any hazardous substance.
It may also order the restitution of the property damaged
and the restitution of the environment for that areas as the
Tribunal may think fit. The Act provides for an expeditious
relief. It requires the Tribunal to deal with the applications or,
as the case may be, appeals, as expeditiously as possible
and obligates the Tribunal to endeavor to dispose of the
application or, the case may be, an appeal finally within six
months from the date of filing the application, or, as the case
may be, the appeal, after providing the parties an
opportunity to be heard.
 Penalty: The act empowers the Green tribunal to award
compensation and unlike other environmental protection
Acts, this Act bestows ample power on the Green Tribunal if
its order are not complied with; the penalty may be either
three years prison or up to ten crores penalty and for
companies it may extend up to twenty five crores. The bill
adopts a tough posture against companies If it is proved that
the offence has been committed with the consent or
connivance of, or is attributable to any neglect on the part of
any director, manager, secretary or other officer of the
company, such director, manager, secretary or other officers
shall also be deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall be
liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
This is a commendable inclusion in the bill and at least it will
instill sense of fear among higher officials of company to pay
due attention to environmental performance of their
company. But the accused can take defense that he did not
have the knowledge or he has taken all the due care to
prevent the commission of the offence. Hence this strong
inclusion is diluted.
 Procedure: Tribunal is not bound by procedure laid down in
the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and is guided by Principles
of natural justice and Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
 Principled Approach: There are various principles of
international environmental law like sustainable
development, polluter pays principle, common concern for
mankind etc. which have been incorporated in this act and
thus provide for principled approach to solve environmental
problems.
 Balancing Environmental Justice and Development:
Another contentious issue is the challenge of balancing
environmental concerns with developmental aspirations.
Critics argue that the NGT’s stringent regulations and
shutdown orders can hinder economic growth and affect
livelihoods. For instance, its stance on construction in
ecologically sensitive zones has often led to conflicts with
industry representatives who argue for more lenient policies.
The NGT's decisions sometimes receive backlash from state
governments, who perceive its interventions as overreach,
especially in cases where it halts large-scale infrastructure
projects to mitigate environmental impact. Thus, while the
NGT's role is crucial in protecting the environment, it has had
to navigate a complex relationship with government
agencies and industries that often prioritize economic
development over ecological preservation.

 CRITICAL APPRAISAL
 Achievements and Impact
 Since its inception, the NGT has had a significant impact on
India’s environmental landscape. One of its main
achievements has been expediting the resolution of
environmental cases, which previously languished in India’s
regular court system for years.
 The NGT’s effectiveness is evident in its landmark judgments
that address large-scale pollution, mining activities, and
industrial projects. For example, the tribunal’s judgment in
 the Yamuna Cleaning Case mandated strict regulations on
industries discharging waste into the river, reflecting its
proactive stance on curbing water pollution.
 Similarly, in cases concerning the Sterlite Copper Plant
and illegal sand mining, the NGT issued orders to shut
down or penalize violators, underscoring its resolve to curb
industrial exploitation of natural resources.
 The NGT has also empowered civil society by recognizing the
rights of communities impacted by environmental
degradation.
 Its provision allowing public interest litigation (PIL) and suo
moto cognizance has enabled individuals and NGOs to bring
environmental concerns to the forefront.
 The tribunal has thus fostered an environment where
environmental consciousness and accountability can thrive.
 Through its judgments, the NGT has also built a framework
for policy-making, guiding the government in implementing
more stringent regulations and emphasizing sustainable
practices in industrial development.
 In the year 2009–10, a number of initiatives have been
launched or given renewed impetus.

 Climate Change

1). Announced India’s intent to reduce the emissions

intensity of its GDP by 20%–25% between 2005 and 2020,
thus making a major contribution to mitigating climate
change.
2). Expert Group on Low Carbon Strategy for Inclusive
Growth established/set-up under the Planning Commission to
develop a roadmap for low-carbon development.
3). Hosted Delhi high level conference on ‘Climate Change:
Technology Development and Transfer’, that adopted the
‘Delhi Declaration’, which became a key input in the
international climate negotiations.
 4). Released India’s GHG Emissions profile—a summary of
five independent studies—which show that India will remain
a low-emission economy even in the year 2030.
5). Convened Ministerial Meeting of BASIC countries – Brazil,
South Africa, China and India—to discuss collaboration in
climate change negotiations and broader collaboration.
6). Launched the Indian Network for Climate Change
Assessment (INCCA), in October 2009, as a network-based
programmed to make science, particularly the ‘3 Ms’—
Measuring, Modelling and Monitoring—the essence of our
policy-making in the climate change space. It brings together
over 120 institutions and over 220 scientists from across the
country.
 Compensatory Afforestation Management (CAMPA)
The Supreme Court directed creation of a Compensatory
Afforestation Fund, in which all funds received from user
agencies towards compensatory afforestation were to be
deposited. However, for seven years between 2002 and 2009
the fund could not be accessed by any of the states because
of a disagreement on the manner of its disbursement:
1). To resolve the deadlock the MoEF moved the Supreme
Court to give effect to an adhoc CAMPA authority that would
in the interim period monitor discharge and monitor the use
of funds. It was agreed that ultimately this body would give
over control to the state CAMPAs.
2). By the end of January 2010, following national level
sessions on the disbursement and use of CAMPA, 22
states/UTs have operationalized their accounts.
3). Out of the received amounts of approximately 13,000
crore in the ad hoc CAMPA, the state CAMPAs have so far
been allocated approximately Rs 1000 crore.
 Mission Clean Ganga
 1). The ‘Mission Clean Ganga’ Initiative was launched with
the first meeting of the National Ganga River Basin Authority
(NGRBA) held on 5 October 2009 under the chairmanship of
Prime Minister. It was decided that under ‘Mission Clean
Ganga’, no untreated municipal sewage and industrial
effluents will flow into the river Ganga by year 2020. The
allocation for the NGRBA was doubled to Rs 500 crore for the
financial year 2010-11.
2). New projects worth Rs 1394.11 crore were cleared,
including projects worth Uttar Pradesh (Rs 800 crore), Bihar
(Rs 440 crore), West Bengal (Rs 105 crore) and Uttarakhand
(Rs 45 crore).
These include projects for development of sewer networks,
sewage treatment plants and sewage pumping stations,
electric crematoria, community toilets, development of river
fronts, resuscitation of canals, and public campaigns.
3). These measures signify the importance and urgency that
Ministry is placing on the River Ganga, which has such an
important place in our culture, and which is so central to the
livelihoods of millions of our people.
4). In addition to these measures, the Ministry is negotiating
a major loan of about US$ 1 billion with the World Bank for
Ganga cleaning, which is progressing on track.
 Criticisms and Challenges
 Despite its achievements, the NGT faces numerous criticisms
and operational challenges. One of the primary concerns is
its limited jurisdiction, as it can only address cases that fall
under specific acts, such as the Water Act, Air Act,
Environment Protection Act, and Forest Conservation
Act.
 This restriction limits the tribunal’s ability to
comprehensively address all environmental issues and often
leaves it reliant on the government to enforce its decisions.
 Another criticism stems from the tribunal’s lack of
independence, as the NGT’s financial resources and
 appointments are controlled by the central government,
which raises questions about its autonomy in cases involving
powerful industries or state interests.
 Moreover, the effectiveness of the NGT has been hindered by
inadequate infrastructure and insufficient staff, resulting in
case backlogs and delays.
 While the NGT was established to deliver swift justice, the
shortage of judges and technical experts has compromised
this objective, limiting its ability to process complex cases.
 Additionally, the tribunal’s decisions are sometimes
contested in higher courts, leading to prolonged legal battles
that undermine the NGT’s goal of rapid dispute resolution.
 This trend of appeal to the Supreme Court also reflects a lack
of clarity regarding the NGT’s authority and its relationship
with other judicial bodies, creating ambiguity about the
tribunal’s place within India’s legal system.
 CONCLUSION
“National Green Tribunal Act is a path breaking legislation
which is unique in many ways. It will provide a new
dimension to environment adjudication by curtailing delays
and imparting objectivity. The Tribunal, given its composition
and jurisdiction, including wide powers to settle environment
dispute and providing relief, compensation including
restitution of environment, is envisaged to be a specialized
environmental adjudicatory body having both original as well
as appellate jurisdiction.” National Green Tribunal is thus a
new beginning for India's struggle between development and
environment. Despite some inherent flaws, NGT is a
significant initiative by the Government and the rightful
implementation of the law would certainly usher the country
towards the path of Sustainable Development and guarantee
a harmonious relationship between the environment and
society. The establishment of NGT provides us with an
opportunity to reorganize our thoughts on how an institution
is to function. The Gandhian approach to environment is
encapsulated in “the earth has enough resources for our
needs, but not for our own greed.”
In conclusion, the National Green Tribunal has played a
pivotal role in shaping environmental governance in India
since its establishment in 2010. By providing a dedicated
forum for environmental disputes, it has enhanced access to
justice for affected communities and promoted a more
responsive regulatory framework. However, challenges
remain, including issues of capacity, enforcement, and
consistency in decision-making. While the NGT has made
significant strides in addressing environmental concerns, its
effectiveness is often hampered by bureaucratic hurdles and
a lack of public awareness. For the tribunal to fulfil its
mandate fully, there is a need for greater integration of
scientific expertise, enhanced stakeholder engagement, and
robust mechanisms for implementation of its orders. Overall,
the NGT stands as a crucial institution in India's quest for
sustainable development, but its future effectiveness will
depend on ongoing reforms and a commitment to
environmental justice.
In conclusion, while the National Green Tribunal (NGT)
represents a significant advancement in India’s
environmental governance, its impact has been mixed. On
one hand, it has expedited the resolution of environmental
disputes, raised awareness about critical issues, and offered
a dedicated forum for environmental justice. However,
challenges such as limited jurisdiction, enforcement
difficulties, potential for executive interference, and
inadequate resources have hindered its ability to fully realize
its mission. Strengthening the NGT will require expanding its
jurisdiction to cover a broader range of environmental laws,
ensuring greater independence in its operations, and
enhancing coordination with state agencies to enforce its
rulings effectively. If these areas are addressed, the NGT
could become a more powerful and reliable institution for
protecting India's environment amid increasing
developmental pressures.
The National Green Tribunal has undoubtedly carved a niche
for itself as a guardian of India’s environmental rights,
setting precedents for green jurisprudence in India. However,
for the NGT to fulfil its mission more effectively, there is a
need to address its structural and operational challenges.
Strengthening the tribunal's independence, expanding its
jurisdiction, increasing financial and human resources, and
enhancing coordination with other judicial bodies are
essential steps to make the NGT a more robust and efficient
body. Further, a greater emphasis on balancing development
with ecological conservation through a framework that
fosters dialogue and cooperation between stakeholders could
enhance the tribunal's role in a developing economy like
India.
In conclusion, while the NGT is a promising and innovative
approach to tackling environmental issues, it requires
ongoing reforms to fulfil its mandate fully. Through these
improvements, the NGT can continue to contribute to India’s
sustainable development, setting a benchmark for
environmental governance in emerging economies.