M/S TRIVENI ENGINEERING AND INDUSTRIES LTD. v. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
Discusses principles of natural justice, fair procedure, and statutory interpretation.
Court: Supreme Court of India
Citation: 2025 INSC 1060
Decision Date: 01-09-2025
List of Laws
The National Green Tribunal Act, 2010; Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974; Environment Protection Act, 1986; Companies Act, 2013; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Indian Penal Code, 1860; General Principles of Law
- The National Green Tribunal Act, 2010: The judgment extensively discusses the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. Section 2(1)(c) defines 'environment'. Section 2(1)(m) defines 'substantial question relating to environment'. Section 14 outlines the NGT's jurisdiction over civil cases involving a substantial question relating to the environment. Section 15 deals with relief, compensation, and restitution that the NGT may provide. Section 17 addresses liability to pay relief or compensation in certain cases. Section 19(1) states that the NGT is not bound by the Code of Civil Procedure but is guided by the principles of natural justice. The judgment emphasizes that Section 19(1) is "qua the procedure to be adopted by the NGT in conducting its proceedings" and cannot justify abandoning statutory procedures. The court found a "clear violation of the provisions contained in Section 19" in the present case.
- Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974: The judgment extensively discusses the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. Section 2 is the definition clause. Section 2(dd) defines 'outlet'. Section 2(e) defines 'pollution'. Section 2(g) defines 'sewage effluent'. Section 2(gg) defines 'sewer'. Section 2(j) defines 'stream'. Section 2(k) defines 'trade effluent'. Section 21 empowers the State Pollution Control Board to take samples of water, sewage, or trade effluent for analysis. Section 21(1) outlines the power to take samples. Section 21(2) states that analysis results are inadmissible as evidence unless subsections (3), (4), and (5) are complied with. The judgment details the procedure for taking samples under Section 21(3), (4), and (5), including serving notice, dividing the sample, sealing containers, and sending them to a laboratory. Section 22 concerns reports of the result of analysis on samples taken under Section 21. Section 22(1) discusses the analysis of samples and submission of reports. Section 22(2) discusses the distribution of the report. Section 22(3) discusses the analysis of samples sent under specific clauses of Section 21. Section 22(4) addresses inconsistencies in analysis results. Section 22(5) concerns the cost of sample analysis. Section 24 prohibits the release or disposal of polluting matter into any stream or well or sewer or on land. Section 24(1) is relevant. Section 43 outlines penalties for contravening Section 24. The court found "complete violation of the procedures laid down in the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, more particularly Sections 21 and 22".
- Environment Protection Act, 1986: The judgment discusses the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. Section 2(a) defines 'environment'. Section 2(b) defines 'environmental pollutant'. Section 2(c) defines 'environmental pollution'. Section 2(f) defines 'occupier'. Sections 7, 8, 14A, 15, and 15A are included in Chapter III, which deals with prevention, control, and abatement of environmental pollution. Section 7 prohibits the discharge or emission of environmental pollutants exceeding prescribed standards. Section 8 regulates the handling of hazardous substances. Section 14A provides for penalties for contravention of Sections 7 and 8. Section 15 deals with penalties for contravention of the Act's provisions, rules, orders, and directions. Section 15A provides for penalties for contravention by companies. The court found "complete violation of the procedures laid down in...the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986".
- Companies Act, 2013: The judgment mentions that the appellant is a public limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. No specific sections are discussed.
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: The judgment notes that Section 19(1) of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, states that the NGT shall not be bound by the procedure laid down by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, but shall be guided by the principles of natural justice.
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: The judgment mentions that subsection (5) of Section 19 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, states that the NGT shall be deemed to be a civil court for the purposes of Section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: The judgment mentions that subsection (5) of Section 19 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, states that all proceedings before NGT shall be deemed to be judicial proceedings within the meaning of Sections 193, 219 and 228 for the purposes of Section 196 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
- General Principles of Law: The judgment extensively discusses the principles of natural justice, particularly the 'audi alteram partem' rule (right to be heard). It cites A.K. Kraipak Vs. Union of India, S.N. Mukherjee Vs. Union of India, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai Vs. Ankita Sinha, T. Takano Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India, State Bank of India Vs. Rajesh Agarwal, and Kantha Vibhag Yuva Koli Samaj Parivartan Trust Vs. State of Gujarat to support the importance of providing a fair hearing and disclosing relevant materials. The court emphasizes that environmental compensation was quantified and imposed without granting the appellant any opportunity of hearing. The judgment concludes that the impugned orders were passed without following due procedure and violating elementary principles of natural justice.
🔒 For Members Only