Times of India | 5 days ago | 22-09-2022 | 02:40 am
Panaji: A three-member bench headed by Chief Justice of the high court of Bombay, Dipankar Datta, Justice G S Patel and Justice Mahesh Sonak on Wednesday quashed and set aside five notices of the NGT regarding setting up and functioning of a special bench in Delhi, which has been hearing certain cases related to Goa, instead of the western zonal bench, Pune.The high court held this special bench seated at New Delhi to be “illegal” and stated that “only the members of the western zonal bench can hear matters pertaining to the western zonal bench, including matters arising from Goa and Maharashtra”.It also found no question of any administrative exigency “in having matters — unknown, unspecified and with no clarity — being selectively taken and cherry-picked for listing before any so-called special bench”.Stating that environmental concerns of Goa have been “pivotal in shaping the face of environmental law in this country,” the high court reiterated the need to set up a circuit bench of the NGT in Panaji, at the “nerve-centre of this environmental litigation”.“This is the only way that true access to justice can be achieved; and access to justice has been held to be a “part and parcel of the right to life”. That purpose is not achieved by taking courts further and further away from litigants, lawyers and the very people who come to the NGT to seek environmental justice. It is most appropriately achieved by bringing courts of law to the litigants’ doors. This, in our view, is best done by establishing a circuit bench at the nerve-centre of this environmental litigation,” the HC stated.It reminded authorities of the HC judgement of October 11, 2017, which recommended that the authorities must consider in all seriousness a proposal to establish a circuit bench at Panaji in Goa. The HC found all the five notices of the NGT to be ultra-vires the NGT Act and Procedure Rules and found them lacking transparency and accountability. “Nobody knows which case will go to the special bench and which will not, or which might cycle back, when, or why,” the HC stated.Counsel Norma Alvares who represented Goa Foundation with Om D’Costa submitted that the five notices resulted in cases from Goa that were being heard by the western zonal bench of the NGT at Pune being abruptly taken up, for no good reason and without clarity as to which case would be taken and when, by a so-called “special bench” sitting in New Delhi.
Share:
Tagged: |
