Supreme Court of India
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusCENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT & ORS.
- Citation
- 2020 INSC 516
- Decided
- 28 August 2020
- Disposal
- Appeal(s) allowed
- Bench
- ARUN MISHRA
Holding
The NGT lacks the power to order fuel debarment or demand a security deposit; it may only enforce the statutory penalties already provided under the Central Motor Vehicles Rules.
Summary
The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against two orders of the National Green Tribunal (NGT) that directed the State to prohibit fuel dealers from supplying petrol to any motor vehicle that did not display a valid Pollution Under Control (PUC) certificate and to deposit Rs 25 crore as security for compliance. The respondents, a research centre, had sought these directions to enforce emission standards under the Motor Vehicles Rules. The Supreme Court examined whether the NGT had jurisdiction to impose such fuel‑debarment and security‑deposit requirements, given that the 1989 Central Motor Vehicles Rules and the NGT Act do not provide for them. It held that the Tribunal could only direct strict implementation of Rules 115 and 116, which already prescribe suspension of registration for non‑compliance, and could not order additional penalties not authorized by statute. Consequently, the Court set aside the directions to block fuel supply and to make a security deposit, while affirming the State’s duty to enforce the existing rules, and allowed the appeals.
Issues considered
- Whether the National Green Tribunal could direct the State Government to issue orders or instructions to dealers, outlets and petrol pumps not to supply fuel to vehicles lacking a valid PUC certificate.
- Whether motor vehicles that do not display a valid PUC certificate can be debarred from being supplied fuel.
- Whether the Tribunal could direct the State to deposit Rs 25 crore as security for compliance with its order in a review proceeding.
Legislation cited
- Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981s. 16, s. 17, s. 2, s. 20, s. 39, s. 41, s. 52
- Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989s. 115, s. 116
- Environment (Protection) Act, 1986s. 10, s. 11, s. 15, s. 17, s. 18, s. 19, s. 23, s. 24, s. 3, s. 5, s. 7
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988s. 110, s. 190(2)
- National Green Tribunal Act, 2010s. 14, s. 15, s. 19, s. 20, s. 2(1)(c), s. 2(1)(m), s. 22, s. 23, s. 24, s. 25, s. 26, s. 28, s. 3
Subjects
National Green TribunalPollution Under Control certificateMotor vehicle emission standardsFuel supply debarmentStatutory jurisdictionEnvironmental lawSecurity depositReview of tribunal order
Judgment
[2020] 12 S.C.R. 1139 1139
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH A
v.
CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT & ORS.
(Civil Appeal Nos. 8932-8933 of 2015) B
AUGUST 28, 2020
[ARUN MISHRA AND INDIRA BANERJEE, JJ.]
National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 – ss. 2(1)(c), (m), 3, 14,
15, 19, 20, 22-24 – Blanket directions issued by National Green
C
Tribunal (NGT) that motor vehicles not displaying valid Pollution
Under Control (PUC) Certificate would suffer suspension/revocation
of Registration Certificate, and would also be debarred from being
supplied fuel – Review – Rejected – On appeal, held: Stoppage of
supply of fuel to vehicles not complying with the requirement to
have and/or display a valid PUC Certificate is not contemplated D
either in the 1989 Rules or in the NGT Act – Tribunal had no power
to pass orders directing the State Government to issue orders/
instructions/directions to dealers, outlets and petrol pumps not to
supply fuel to vehicles without PUC Certificate – Further, Tribunal
also had no power to direct the State to deposit Rs.25 crores to
E
secure compliance with its order – Such an order should not have
been passed in review when the initial order did not contain any
such direction – Impugned orders set aside to the extent issuing
aforesaid directions to the State – However, State to strictly implement
compliance of rr.115, 116 and penalize all those contravening –
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 – rr.115, F
116 –Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 – ss.2,
16, 17, 20, 39, 41, 52 – Environment Protection Act, 1986 – ss.3, 5,
7, 10, 11, 15, 17-19, 23, 24 – Environmental Law.
Allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD : 1.1 Rule 115 (7) of Central Motor Vehicles Rules, G
1989 provides that after the expiry of a period of one year from
the date on which the motor vehicle was first registered, every
such vehicle shall carry a valid “Pollution under control”
certificate issued by an agency authorized for this purpose by the
State Government. The validity of the certificate shall be for [six H
1139
1140 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 12 S.C.R.
A months] and the certificate shall always be carried in the vehicle
and produced on demand by the officers referred to in sub-rule
(1) of Rule 116. Rule 116 and in particular sub-Rule (1) read with
sub-Rules 2 to 5 thereof empower an officer to direct the driver
or any other person in charge of a motor vehicle to submit the
vehicle for a test to measure the standards of emission in an
B
authorised testing station and produce a certificate. The driver
and/or the person in charge of the vehicle is obliged to comply
with such direction. The consequences of non-compliance of Rules
115(2) and (7) are prescribed in sub-Rules (4) to (9) of Rule 116
of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules. [Paras 22, 24 and 25][1158-
C D; 1160-D-E]
1.2 The Green Tribunal Act, 2010 has been enacted to
establish a National Green Tribunal for the effective and
expeditious disposal of cases relating, inter alia, to environmental
protection and matters connected therewith. Section 2(1) (c) of
D the said Act defines environment to include water, air and land
and the inter-relationship, which exists among and between water,
air and land and human beings, other living creatures, plants,
micro-organism and property. Section 2(1) (m) defines “substantial
question relating to environment’. Section 15 clothes the National
Green Tribunal with power to pass orders of relief, compensation
E and restitution. Section 23 enables the Tribunal to make such
order as to costs as it may consider necessary and Section 24
empowers the Tribunal to make an award for monetary
compensation or relief on the ground of damage to environment.
An award or order or decision of the Tribunal under the National
F Green Tribunal Act is executable as a decree of the Civil Court,
by the Tribunal itself, for which purpose the Tribunal has all the
powers of a Civil Court. The Tribunal may also transmit any order
or award made by it to a Civil Court for execution. An appeal
from a decision of the Tribunal lies to the Court under Section 22
on one or more grounds specified in section 100 of the Code of
G Civil Procedure and/or in other words on a substantial question
of law. This Court does not, therefore, deem it necessary to
examine the correctness of any factual findings in the judgments
and orders under appeal. The Tribunal constituted under the NGT
Act has jurisdiction under Section 14 of the said Act to decide all
H civil cases where any substantial question relating to environment
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH v. CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT 1141
PROTECTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
including enforcement of any right relating to environment is A
involved and such question arises out of the implementation of
the enactments specified in Schedule I to the said Act, which
includes The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981
and the Environment Protection Act, 1986. In view of the
definition of “substantial question of environment in Section 2(m)
B
of the NGT Act, the Tribunal can examine and decide the question
of violation of any specific statutory environmental obligation,
which affects or is likely to affect a group of individuals, or the
community at large. For exercise of power under Section 14 of
the NGT Act, a substantial question of law should be involved
including any legal right to environment and such question should C
arise out of implementation of the specified enactments. Violation
of any specific statutory environmental obligation gives rise to a
substantial question of law and not just statutory obligations under
the enactments specified in Schedule I. However, the question
must arise out of implementation of one or more of the
D
enactments specified in Schedule I. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
may not be specified in Schedule I to the NGT Act. However, the
statutory 1989 Rules framed under the said Act casts statutory
environmental obligations on manufacturers, owners and others
in control of motor vehicles, as also the State and other statutory
authorities under the said Act. The enforcement of the statutory E
environmental obligations under the 1989 Rules, which is a
substantial question relating to environment, arises out of
implementation of the 1981 Act and the Environment Protection
Act and, in particular, Section 20 of the 1981 Act which casts on
the State Government the mandatory duty to give instructions to
F
the authorities in charge of Registration of Motor Vehicles with
a view to ensure compliance of the standards of emission of our
pollutants and Section 7 of the Environmental Protection Act,
which prohibits any person from carrying on any operation, which
would include operation of a motor vehicle, from discharging or
emitting any environmental pollutants in excess of prescribed G
standards or permitting such discharge or emission. On a
combined reading of Sections 3, 7, 10, 11 and 23 of the
Environment Protection Act, with particular reference to Section
3(1), 3(2)(i)(a) and (b), 3(2) (iii, iv) and 3(2)(x) with Section 20 of
the 1981 Act and Sections 14, read with 2(c), and 2(m) of the
H
1142 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 12 S.C.R.
A NGT Act and Rules 115 and 116 of the 1989 Rules, the Tribunal
had the power, authority and/or jurisdiction to direct the appellant
State Government to strictly implement the requirement of
vehicles to possess and/or display a valid PUC Certificate, and
also to direct the appellant State Government and/or the other
authorities concerned to take penal action in accordance with
B
law, that is, Rules 115/116 of the 1989 Rules. On a purposive
reading of Section 20 with Section 17(1)(g) of the 1981 Act, the
standards of emission prescribed by Rules 115 and 116 of the
1989 Rules attract Section 20 of the 1981 Act. Driving a vehicle
without a pollution PUC certificate entails (i) suspension of
C registration certificate; (ii) imprisonment which may extend to
three months; (iii) fine which may extend to Rs.10,000/- or both
(iv) disqualification for holding licence for a period of three months
(v) imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months or
with fine which may extend to Rs.10,000/- or with fine. A perusal
of Rule 116(8) and (9) makes it amply clear that the suspension
D
of the certificate of registration is temporary. The suspension is
until such time as a certificate is produced before the Registering
Authority certifying that the vehicle complies with sub Rules (2)
and (7) of the Rule 115 of the Central rules. A Certificate of
Registration is also to be deemed to have been suspended, until
E a fresh Pollution Under Control certificate is obtained. When a
Statute or a Statutory Rules prescribed a penalty for any act or
omission, no other penalty not contemplated in the Statute or a
Statutory Rules can be imposed. When Statute requires a thing
to be done in a particular manner, it is to be done only in that
manner. Stoppage of supply of fuel to vehicles not complying with
F
the requirement to have and/or display a valid PUC Certificate is
not contemplated either in the 1989 Rules or in the NGT Act.
Motor Vehicles not complying with the requirement of possessing
and/or displaying a valid PUC Certificate cannot be debarred from
being supplied fuel. The Tribunal (Central Zonal Bench, Bhopal)
G had no power and/or authority and/or jurisdiction to pass orders
directing the Appellant State Government to issue orders,
instructions or directions on dealers, outlets and petrol pumps
not to supply fuel to vehicles without PUC Certificate. [Paras 26-
28, 31, 33, 35, 37–43, 48-50, 52 and 54][1160-E-G; 1162-A; 1164-
C-D; 1165-F; 1166-B-H; 1167-A-D; 1168-B-E, F; 1169-A-B]
H
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH v. CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT 1143
PROTECTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
1.3 The orders passed by the Tribunal are binding on and A
enforceable against the Appellant State. The Tribunal had the
power, authority and jurisdiction to direct the Appellant State to
strictly implement compliance with Rules 115 and 116. An order
of the Tribunal under the NGT Act is enforceable in the manner
provided in Section 25 of the NGT Act. There is no provision in
B
the NGT Act for deposit of security to secure compliance of an
order of the Tribunal. The penalty for failure to comply with an
order of the Tribunal entails the penalty prescribed in Sections
26 and 28 of the NGT Act. Section 39 of the 1981 Act and Section
15 of the Environment Protection Act pertain to penalty and/or
punishment for contravention of the provisions of the 1981 Act, C
and/or the Environment Protection Act and the rules, orders and
directions issued thereunder and Section 41 of the 1981 Act and
Section 17 of the Environment Protection Act governs offences
by Government Departments. None of the provisions provide
for monetary deposit to secure compliance of an order. The
D
Tribunal had no power and/or authority and/or jurisdiction to direct
the appellant State to deposit Rs.25 crores to secure compliance
with its order. In any case such an order should not have been
passed in review when the initial order did not contain any
direction for security deposit. The impugned judgments and
orders of the Tribunal are set aside to the extent that the Tribunal E
has directed the Appellant State to make a deposit of Rs.25 crores
by way of security and also to the extent that the Tribunal has
directed the appellant State to issue orders and/or instructions
and/or directions on all dealers and/or outlets and/or petrol pumps
not to supply fuel to vehicles which do not comply with the
F
requirement of producing and/or displaying valid PUC
Certificates. The State appellant shall, however, strictly implement
compliance of Rules 115 and 116 of the Rules and penalize all
those who contravene the said Rules in accordance with the
provisions of the 1989 Rules. [Paras 55-60][1169-B-H; 1170-A]
M. C. Mehta v. Union of India 1988 SC 1030; Dayal v. G
Union of India AIR 2004 SC 867 : [2003] 3 Suppl.
SCR 152 – relied on.
H
1144 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 12 S.C.R.
A Case Law Reference
1988 SC 1030 relied on Para 14
[2003] 3 Suppl. SCR 152 relied on Para 15
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 8932-
B 8933 of 2015.
From the Judgment and Order dated 21.04.2015 and 03.08.2015
of the National Green Tribunal, Central Zonal Bench, Bhopal in OA No.
1 of 2013 and MA No. 394 of 2015.
Sunil Fernandes, AAG, Zeeshan Diwan, Ms. Nupur Kumar,
C Ms. Priyansha Indra Sharma, Rahul Kaushik, Atul Dewan, Deepkaran
Dalal, M.C. Dhingra, Advs. for the Appellant.
Ms. Alka Agrawal, A.K. Kaul, Raj Bahadur, Ms. Kirti Dua,
Kaushal Yadav, Rajul Shrivastav, Anup Jain, AdvS. for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
D
INDIRA BANERJEE, J.
1. These appeals filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh, are against
an order dated 21st April, 2015 passed by the National Green Tribunal,
Central Zonal Bench, Bhopal, allowing Original Application No. 1/2013
E (CZ) filed by the Respondents and directing that motor vehicles not
complying with the requirement of displaying a valid “Pollution Under
Control” (PUC) Certificate would suffer the consequence of suspension
and/or revocation of the Registration Certificate of the vehicle, and would
also not be provided with fuel by any dealer or petrol pump, as well as an
order dated 3rd August, 2015 rejecting the application filed by the appellant
F for review of the said order dated 21st April, 2015, being the Miscellaneous
Application No.394 of 2015, but granting the appellant a further period
of sixty days for compliance of the order under review on condition of
the appellant making a deposit of Rs.25 crores with the Registrar of the
Tribunal within a week from the order dated 3rd August, 2015, by way of
G security for compliance with the order, failing which the security deposit
would be utilized for environmental needs under the National Green
Tribunal Act, 2010.
2 (1). On or about 21st July, 2003, the Respondents filed a Public
Interest Litigation (PIL) being Writ Petition No.1341 of 2003 before
H
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH v. CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT 1145
PROTECTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT [INDIRA BANERJEE, J.]
the Indore Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, seeking A
directions on the appellant and other concerned authorities
impleaded as respondents, to take immediate steps to stop the
plying of motor vehicles which did not conform to pollution control
norms, on the roads of Indore, and other consequential orders.
(2) By an order dated 3rd January, 2013 the High Court transferred B
the aforesaid writ petition to the Principal Bench of the National
Green Tribunal, Delhi and the same was re-numbered as Original
Application No.73 of 2012.
(3) Sometime in March 2013, the Principal Bench, National Green
Tribunal, Delhi transferred O.A. No.73 of 2012 to the Central C
Zonal Bench of the National Green Tribunal at Bhopal and the
same was re-numbered as O.A. No.1/2013. The Original
Application No.01/2013 was taken up for hearing on 21st April,
2015.
On the same day, that is, 21st April, 2015. National Green Tribunal, D
Central Zonal Bench, Bhopal, hereinafter referred to as the learned
Tribunal, passed an order noting that the mandatory requirement of Rule
115 read with Rule 116 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 for
motor vehicles to display a valid PUC Certificate was not being
implemented. The learned Tribunal did not find the reasons given by the
Appellant State for its inability to effectively enforce Rule 115 read with E
Rule 116 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules satisfactory, including the
reason that most of the pollution checking centres were not in working
order and more centres authorized to issue PUC Certificates were
required to be set up.
(4) The learned Tribunal held that it was the responsibility of the F
State and its Transport Department to ensure compliance of the
Rules and directed that the vehicles not complying with pollution
norms and not possessing a valid PUC Certificate would have to
suffer the consequence of suspension and/or revocation of the
Registration Certificate of the vehicle. The learned Tribunal also G
held that a vehicle not displaying a valid PUC Certificate could
not be provided with fuel by any dealer or petrol pump. The
appellant State Government was directed to take necessary steps
in this regard by issuing necessary orders, instructions and/or
directions within 31st July, 2015 and to give wide publicity to such
H
1146 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 12 S.C.R.
A orders, instructions, and/or directions. The matter was directed to
be listed on 3rd August 2015 for reporting compliance.
3. As stated above, an application filed by the Appellant being
M.A. No. 394/2015, for review of the said order dated 21.4.2015 has
also been rejected by the order dated 3.8.2015, also under appeal before
B this Court. The appellant had, by the aforesaid order dated 3.8.2015,
been granted further 60 days for compliance with the order under review,
on condition of deposit, within a week from the date of the said order, an
amount of Rs.25 crores by way of security for compliance with the said
order, failing which the security deposit would be utilised for environmental
needs under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.
C
4. The main questions involved in this appeal are (a) whether the
learned Tribunal could have directed the appellant State Government to
issue orders and/or instructions and/or directions to petrol pumps or retail
outlets or dealers not to supply fuel to vehicles not having a valid PUC;
(b) whether motor vehicles not complying with the requirement of
D displaying a valid PUC Certificate can be debarred from being provided
with fuel by any dealer/or petrol pump or outlet; and (c) whether a Tribunal
constituted under the Green Tribunal Act, 2010 could have passed orders
directing the State Government to make a monetary deposit to secure
compliance of an order, and that too in an application for review of an
E order, which did not contain any such direction.
5. Over the last several decades, there has been a growing concern
worldwide, over pollution and the consequential decline in air quality.
Increase in pollution has led to loss of vegetative cover and ecological/
biological diversity, excessive concentration of harmful chemicals in the
F ambient atmosphere, growing risks of environmental accidents and has
posed a threat to life support systems.
6. In the United Nations Conference on Human Environment held
at Stockholm in June, 1972 it was resolved to protect environment
including the quality of air, and to control air pollution. At the said
G conference the Indian Government voiced environmental concern and
emphasized on the need to take steps to improve the environment.
7. Keeping view the decisions taken at the Stockholm Conference,
the Indian Parliament enacted the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution)
Act, 1981, hereinafter referred to as the 1981 Act, to, inter alia, provide
for the prevention and abatement of our pollution.
H
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH v. CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT 1147
PROTECTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT [INDIRA BANERJEE, J.]
8. Some of the relevant provisions of the 1981 Act are:- A
“2. Definitions —In this Act, unless the context otherwise
requires,—
(a) “air pollutant” means any solid, liquid or gaseous substance
including noise present in the atmosphere in such concentration
as may be or tend to be injurious to human beings or other living B
creatures or plants or property or environment;
(b) “air pollution” means the presence in the atmosphere of any
air pollutant;
(c) ……. C
(d) “approved fuel” means any fuel approved by the State Board
for the purposes of this Act;
(e) “automobile” means any vehicle powered either by internal
combustion engine or by any method of generating power to drive
such vehicle by burning fuel; D
(f) …….
(g) …….
(h) …….
(i) …….. E
(j) “emission” means any solid or liquid or gaseous substance
coming out of any chimney, duct or flue or any other outlet;
………….
16. Functions of Central Board.—(1) Subject to the provisions F
of this Act, and without prejudice to the performance, of its
functions under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution)
Act, 1974 (6 of 1974), the main functions of the Central Board
shall be to improve the quality of air and to prevent, control or
abate air pollution in the country.
G
(2) In particular and without prejudice to the generality of the
foregoing functions, the Central Board may—
(a) advise the Central Government on any matter concerning the
improvement of the quality of air and the prevention, control or
abatement of air pollution; H
1148 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 12 S.C.R.
A (b) plan and cause to be executed a nation-wide programme for
the prevention, control or abatement of air pollution;
(c) co-ordinate the activities of the State and resolve disputes
among them;
(d) provide technical assistance and guidance to the State Boards,
B carry out and sponsor investigations and research relating to
problems of air pollution and prevention, control or abatement of
air pollution;
(dd) perform such of the functions of any State Board as may be
specified in and order made under sub-section (2) of section 18;
C
(e) plan and organise the training of persons engaged or to be
engaged in programmes for the prevention, control or abatement
of air pollution on such terms and conditions as the Central Board
may specify;
D (f) organise through mass media a comprehensive programme
regarding the prevention, control or abatement of air pollution;
(g) collect, compile and publish technical and statistical data relating
to air pollution and the measures devised for its effective
prevention, control or abatement and prepare manuals, codes or
guides relating to prevention, control or abatement of air pollution;
E
(h) lay down standards for the quality of air;
17. Functions of State Boards.—(1) Subject to the provisions
of this Act, and without prejudice to the performance of its
functions, if any, under the Water (Prevention and Control of
F Pollution) Act, 1974 (Act 6 of 1974), the functions of a State
Board shall be—
……….
(e) to inspect, at all reasonable times, any control equipment,
industrial plant or manufacturing process and to give, by order,
G such directions to such persons as it may consider necessary to
take steps for the prevention, control or abatement of air pollution;
………
(g) to lay down, in consultation with the Central Board and having
regard to the standards for the quality of air laid down by the
H
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH v. CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT 1149
PROTECTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT [INDIRA BANERJEE, J.]
Central Board, standards for emission of air pollutants into the A
atmosphere from industrial plants and automobiles or for the
discharge of any air pollutant into the atmosphere from any other
source whatsoever not being a ship or an aircraft:
Provided that different standards for emission may be laid down
under this clause for different industrial plants having regard to B
the quantity and composition of emission of air pollutants into the
atmosphere from such industrial plants;
………
(i) to Perform such other functions as may be prescribed or as
may, from time to time, be entrusted to it by the Central Board or C
the State Government;
(j) to do such other things and to perform such other acts as it
may think necessary for the proper discharge of its functions and
generally for the purpose of carrying into effect the purposes of
this Act. D
20. Power to give instructions for ensuring standards for
emission from automobiles —With a view to ensuring that the
standards for emission of air pollutants from automobiles laid down
by the State Board under clause (g) of sub-section (1) of section
17 are complied with, the State Government shall, in consultation E
with the State Board, give such instructions as may be deemed
necessary to the concerned authority in charge of registration of
motor vehicles under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (4 of 1939),
and such authority shall, notwithstanding anything contained in
that Act or the rules made thereunder be bound to comply with F
such instructions.
39. Penalty for contravention of certain provisions of the
Act —Whoever contravenes any of the provisions of this Act or
any order or direction issued thereunder, for which no penalty has
been elsewhere provided in this Act, shall be punishable with
G
imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or
with fine which may extend to ten thousand rupees or with both,
and in the case of continuing contravention, with an additional
fine which may extend to five thousand rupees for every day
during which such contravention continues after conviction for
the first such contravention. H
1150 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 12 S.C.R.
A 41. Offences by Government Departments.—(1) Where an
offence under this Act has been committed by any Department
of Government, the Head of the Department shall be deemed to
be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against
and punished accordingly:
B Provided that nothing contained in this section shall render such
Head of the Department liable to any punishment if he proves
that the offence was committed without his knowledge or that he
exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such
offence.
C (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where
an offence under this Act has been committed by a Department
of Government and 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 officer, other than the Head of the
Department, such officer shall also be deemed to be guilty of that
D offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished
accordingly
52. Effect of other laws —Save as otherwise provided by or
under the Atomic Energy Act, 1962 (33 of 1962), in relation to
radioactive air pollution the provisions of this Act shall have effect
E notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any
enactment other than this Act”.
9. Later, the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 was enacted to
provide for protection and improvement of environment and for matters
connected therewith, with the view to implement the decision taken at
F the United Nations Conference on Human Environment at Stockholm in
June, 1972, in which India had participated.
10. The Statement of Object and Reasons of the Environment
(Protection) Act is set out herein below for convenience:
“1. Concern over the state of environment has grown
G
the world over since the sixties. The decline in environmental
quality has been evidenced by increasing pollution, loss of
vegetal cover and biological diversity, excessive
concentrations of harmful chemicals in the ambient
atmosphere and in food chains, growing risks of
H
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH v. CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT 1151
PROTECTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT [INDIRA BANERJEE, J.]
environmental accidents and threats to life support systems. A
The world community’s resolve to protect and enhance the
environmental quality found expression in the decisions taken
at the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment
held in Stockholm in June 1972. The Government of India
participated in the Conference and strongly voiced the
B
environmental concerns. While several measures have been
taken for environmental protection both before and after the
Conference, the need for a general legislation further to
implement the decisions of the Conference has become
increasingly evident.
2. Although there are existing laws dealing directly or C
indirectly with several environmental matters, it is necessary
to have a general legislation for environmental protection.
Existing laws generally focus on specific types of pollution
or on specific categories of hazardous substances. Some major
areas of environmental hazards are not covered. There also D
exist uncovered gaps in areas of major environmental hazards.
There are inadequate linkages in handling matters of
industrial and environmental safety. Control mechanisms to
guard against slow, insidious build up of hazardous substances
especially new chemicals in the environment, are weak.
Because of a multiplicity of regulatory agencies, there is need E
for an authority which can assume the lead role for studying,
planning and implementing long term requirements of
environmental safety and to give direction to, and co-ordinate
a system of speedy and adequate response to emergency
situations threatening the environment. F
3. In view of what has been stated above, there is urgent need
for the enactment of a general legislation on environmental
protection which inter alia, should enable co-ordination of
activities of the various regulatory agencies, creation of an
authority or authorities with adequate powers for G
environmental protection, regulation of discharge of
environmental pollutants and handling of hazardous
substances, speedy response in the event of accidents
threatening environment and deterrent punishment to those
who endanger human environment, safety and health.
H
1152 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 12 S.C.R.
A 4. The Bill seeks to achieve the above objects.”
11. Section 3 of the Environment Protection Act, 1986 empowers
the Central Government to take all such measures as it may deem
necessary or expedient for the purpose of protecting and improving the
quality of the environment and for preventing and controlling and abating
B environment pollution. Section 3(2) (iv) specifically empowers the Central
Government to lay down standards for emission of environmental
pollutants, whatever be the source. This is in addition, inter alia, to the
general power of the Central Government to lay down standards for the
quality of environment in its various aspects under Section 3(2) (iii) of
the Environmental Protection Act. “Environment Pollutant” includes
C gaseous substances injurious to environment emitted from a motor vehicle.
12. Some of the relevant provisions of the Environmental Protection
Act are set out hereinbelow for convenience.
“5. Power to give Directions
D Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law but
subject to the provisions of this Act, the Central Government
may, in the exercise of its powers and performance of its
functions under this Act, issue directions in writing to any
person, officer or any authority and such person, officer or
E 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,
F operation or process; or
(b) stoppage or regulation of the supply of electricity or water
or any other service.
7. Persons Carrying on Industry, Operation, Etc. not to Allow
Emission or Discharge of Environmental Pollutants in Excess
G of the Standards
No person carrying on any industry, operation or process
shall discharge or emit or permit to be discharged or emitted
any environmental pollutant in excess of such standards as
may be prescribed.
H
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH v. CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT 1153
PROTECTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT [INDIRA BANERJEE, J.]
15. PENALTY FOR CONTRAVENTION OF THE A
PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND THE RULES, ORDERS
AND DIRECTIONS.-
(1) Whoever fails to comply with or contravenes any of the
provisions of this Act, or the rules made or orders or directions
issued thereunder, shall, in respect of each such failure or B
contravention, be punishable with imprisonment for a term
which may extend to five years with fine which may extend to
one lakh rupees, or with both, and in case the failure or
contravention continues, with additional fine which may
extend to five thousand rupees for every day during which
such failure or contravention continues after the conviction C
for the first such failure or contravention. (2) If the failure or
contravention referred to in sub-section (1) continues beyond
a period of one year after the date of conviction, the offender
shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may
extend to seven years. D
17. OFFENCES BY GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS.- (1)
Where an offence under this Act has been committed by any
Department of Government, the Head of the Department shall
be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be
proceeded against and punished accordingly. Provided that E
nothing contained in this section shall render such Head of
the Department liable to any punishment if he proves that the
offence was committed without his knowledge or that he
exercise all due diligence to prevent the commission of such
offence.
F
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1),
where an offence under this Act has been committed by a
Department of Government and 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 officer, other
than the Head of the Department, such officer shall also be G
deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be
proceeded against and punished accordingly.
H
1154 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 12 S.C.R.
A 18. PROTECTION OF ACTION TAKEN IN GOOD FAITH.-
No suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against
the Government or any officer or other employee of the
Government or any authority constituted under this Act or
any member, officer or other employee of such authority in
respect of anything which is done or intended to be done in
B
good faith in pursuance of this Act or the rules made or orders
or directions issued thereunder.
19. COGNIZANCE OF OFFENCES.- No court shall take
cognizance of any offence under this Act except on a
complaint made by— (a) the Central Government or any
C authority or officer authorised in this behalf by that
Government1, or (b) any person who has given notice of not
less than sixty days, in the manner prescribed, of the alleged
offence and of his intention to make a complaint, to the Central
Government or the authority or officer authorised as
D aforesaid.
23. Power to Delegate
Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (3) of
section 3, the Central Government may, by notification in the
Official Gazette, delegate, subject to such conditions and
E limitations as may be specified in the notification, such of its
powers and functions under this Act, [except the power to
constitute an authority under sub-section (3) of section 3 and
to make rules under section 25] as it may deem necessary or
expedient, to any officer, State Government or other authority.
F 24. Effect of Other Laws
(1) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), the provisions
of this Act and the rules or orders made therein shall have
effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith
contained in any enactment other than this Act.
G
(2) Where any act or omission constitutes an offence
punishable under this Act and also under any other Act then
the offender found guilty of such offence shall be liable to be
punished under the other Act and not under this Act.”
H
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH v. CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT 1155
PROTECTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT [INDIRA BANERJEE, J.]
13. Section 24 of the Environment Protection Act provides that A
the provisions of the said Act under Rule or orders made therein shall
have effect not withstanding therein contained in any enactment other
than the Environment Protection Act. Where any act or omission
constitutes an offence punishable under the Environment Protection Act
and also under any other Act, the offender found guilty of such offence
B
is liable to be punished under the other Act.
14. The Central Government is empowered to take all such
measures as it deems necessary or expedient for the purpose of protecting
and improving environment and for preventing, controlling and abating
environmental pollution as observed by this Court in M. C. Mehta v.
union of India reported in 1988 SC 1030. The existence of the power C
to take all necessary measures to control pollution and/or to protect and
improve the environment is coupled with the duty to exercise such power,
if circumstances so warrant. It is in discharge of such duty and/or
obligation, that the Central Government incorporated certain provisions
in the Rules framed under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, as discussed D
hereinafter.
15. In the case of M.C. Mehta (supra), this Court entertained a
Public Interest Litigation, seeking the directions on the Government to,
inter alia, spread information on environmental pollution and the need to
protect environment, free of cost through the radio, television and E
exhibition of films in cinema halls. One of the main goals of the
Environment Protection Act 1986 is to ensure sustainable development.
This is a concomitant of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution
of India, as observed in Dayal V. Union Of India reported in AIR 2004
SC 867.
F
16. In exercise of powers conferred by the Motor Vehicles Act
and in particular Section 110 thereof of the Central Government has
framed the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, hereinafter referred to
as “the 1989 Rules”. The 1989 Rules have also been amended from
time to time to incorporate provisions for laying down standards for
emission, discharge of environmental pollutants from motor vehicles. G
The norms for emission from Motor Vehicles have been incorporated in
Rules, 115, 115A 115B 115C 115D and 115 E to the 1989 Rules read
with the Tables/Annexures appended thereto.
H
1156 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 12 S.C.R.
A 17. Rule 115 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, provides:
“115. Emission of smoke, vapour, etc. from motor vehicles.—
[(1) Every motor vehicle other than motor cycles of engine
capacity not exceeding 70 cc, manufactured prior to the first
day of March 1990, shall be maintained in such condition
B and shall be so driven so as to comply with the standards
prescribed in these rules.]”
(2) On and after 1 st October, 2004, every motor vehicle
operating on -
(i) Petrol/CNG/LPG shall comply with the idling emission
C standards for Carbon Monoxide (CO) and Hydro carbon (HC)
given in the Table below:
…………
(ii) Smoke Density for all diesel driven-vehicles shall be as
D follows:-
………….
(3) On and from the date of commencement of this Sub-rule,
all petrol driven vehicles shall be so manufactured that they
comply with the mass emission standards as specified at
E Annexure I. The breakdown of the operating cycle used for
the test shall be as specified at Annexure II, and the reference
fuel for all such tests shall be specified in Annexure III to
these rules.
(4) On and from the date of commencement of this Sub-rule,
F all diesel driven Vehicles shall be so manufactured that they
comply with the standards based on exhaust gas opacity as
specified at Annexure IV to these rules.
(5) On and from the date of commencement of this sub-rule
all petrol-driven vehicles shall be so manufactured that they
G comply with the following levels of emissions when tested as
per test cycle specified in Annexure V.
Provided the standards for exhaust gas emissions applicable
to agricultural tractors shall be notified separately.
(6) Each motor vehicle manufactured on and after the dates
H specified in sub-rule (2), (3), (4) or (5), shall be certified by
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH v. CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT 1157
PROTECTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT [INDIRA BANERJEE, J.]
the manufacturers to be conforming to the standards specified A
in the said sub-sections, and further certify that the
components liable to effect the emission of gaseous pollutants
are so designed, constructed and assembled as to enable the
vehicle, in normal use, despite the vibration to which it may
be subjected, to comply with the provisions of the said sub-
B
rule.
(7) After the expiry of a period of one year from the date on
which the motor Vehicle was first registered, every such vehicle
shall carry a valid “Pollution under control” certificate issued
by an agency authorized for this purpose by the State
Government. The validity of the certificate shall be for [six C
months] and the certificate shall always be carried in the
vehicle and produced on demand by the officers referred to
in sub-rule (1) of Rule 116.
Provided that the validity of the certificate shall be twelve
months for the vehicles manufacture as per Bharat State-IV D
norms.
(8) The certificate issued under sub-rule (7) shall, while it
remains effective, be valid throughout India.
(9) Mass Emission Standard for Diesel Vehicles E
……….”
18. The standards and/or norms of emission from Motor Vehicles
of pollutant gases such as Carbon Monoxide, Hydro Carbon, etc. are
prescribed in the Tables and Annexures appended to Rule 115. Rules
115A, 115B, 115C, 115D and 115E make special provisions with regard, F
inter alia, to agricultural tractors, construction equipment vehicles,
combine harvesters driven by diesel engines, CNG (compressed Natural
Gas) driven vehicles, LPG (Liquefied Petroleum Gas) driven vehicles,
Retrofitment of hybrid electric system kit to in use vehicles, mass
emission standards of Flex Fuel Ethanol (E85) and Ethanol (ED95)
G
vehicles.
19. Sub-rule (3) of Rule 115 provides that on or from the date of
commencement of the sub-rule, that is, 1st April, 1991, all petrol vehicles
are to be so manufactured, as to comply with the emission standard as
specified in the Rules.
H
1158 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 12 S.C.R.
A 20. Sub-rule (4) of Rule 115 provides that on or from the date of
commencement of the said sub-rule, which is also 1st April, 1991, all
such diesel driven vehicles shall be so manufactured that they comply,
as per their exhaust gas capacity, with the emission standards as specified
in the Rules.
B 21. Sub-rule (6) of Rule 115 provides that each motor Vehicle
manufactured on or after the dates specified in the applicable sub-rules
of Rule 115 shall be certified to conform to the standard specified in the
applicable sub-rules and further certified that the components liable to
effect the emission of gaseous pollutants are so designed, constructed
and assembled as to enable the vehicles, in normal view, despite the
C vibration to which it may be subjected, to comply with the provisions of
the applicable sub-rule.
22. Rule 115 (7) provides that after the expiry of a period of one
year from the date on which the motor vehicle was first registered,
every such vehicle shall carry a valid “Pollution under control” certificate
D issued by an agency authorized for this purpose by the State Government.
The validity of the certificate shall be for [six months] and the certificate
shall always be carried in the vehicle and produced on demand by the
officers referred to in sub-rule (1) of Rule 116.
23. Rule 116 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rule, 1989 provides:
E
“116. Test for smoke emission level and carbon monoxide
level for motor vehicles.-
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (7) of rule
115 any officer not below the rank of sub-Inspector of Police
F or the Inspector of Motor Vehicles who has reason to believe
that a motor vehicle is not complying with the provision of
sub-rule (2) or sub-rule (7) of rule 115, may, in writing, direct
the driver or any person incharge of the vehicle to submit the
vehicle for conducting the test to measure the standards of
emission in any one of the authorized testing stations, and
G produce the certificate to an authority at the address
mentioned in the written direction within 7 days from the date
of conducting the check.
(2) The driver or any other person in charge of the vehicle
shall upon such direction by the officer referred to in sub-
H
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH v. CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT 1159
PROTECTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT [INDIRA BANERJEE, J.]
rule (1) submit the vehicle for testing for compliance of the A
provisions of 16 [sub-rule (2) and sub-rule (7) of rule 115],
at any authorized testing station.
(3) The measurement for compliance of the provisions of 16
[sub-rule (2) and sub-rule (7) of rule 115] shall be done with
a meter of the type approved by any agency referred to in B
rule 126 of the principal rules or by the National
Environmental Engineering Research Institute, Nagpur – 440
001:
[Provided that such a testing agency shall follow MoSRTH/
CMVR/TAP-115/116 for approval of measuring metres;] C
(4) If the result of the tests indicate that the motor vehicle
complies with the provisions [sub- rule (2) and sub-rule (7)
of rule 115], the driver or any person incharge of the vehicle
shall produce the certificate to the authority specified in sub-
rule (1) within the stipulated time-limit. D
(5) If the test results indicate that the motor vehicle does not
comply with the provisions of [sub-rule (2) and sub-rule (7)
of rule 115], the driver or any person incharge of the vehicle
shall rectify the defects so as to comply with the provisions of
the sub-rule (2) of rule 115 within a period of 7 days and E
submit the vehicle to any authorized testing stations to the
authority referred to in sub-rule (1).
(6) If the certificate referred to in sub-rule (1) is not produced
within the stipulated period of seven days or if the vehicle
fails to comply with the provisions of 17[sub-rule (2) and F
sub-rule (7) of rule 115] within a period of seven days, the
owner of the vehicle shall be liable for the penalty prescribed
under sub-section (2) of section 190 of the Act.
(7) If the driver or any person incharge of the vehicle referred
to in sub-rule (1) does not produce the said certificate within
G
the said period of 7 days, such vehicle shall be deemed to
have contravened the provisions of the sub-rule (2) of rule
115 and the checking officer shall report the matter to the
registering authority.
H
1160 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 12 S.C.R.
A (8)The registering authority shall on receipt of the report
referred to in sub-rule (7), for reasons to be recorded in writing
suspend the certificate of registration of the vehicle, until such
time the certificate is produced before the registering authority
to the effect that the vehicle complies with the provisions of,
17a [sub-rule (2) and sub-rule (7) of rule 115].
B
(9) On such suspension of the certificate of registration of
the vehicle, any permit granted in respect of the vehicle under
Chapter V or under Chapter VI of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988(59 of 1988) shall be deemed to have been suspended
until a fresh “Pollution under control” certificate is
C obtained.]”
24. Rule 116 and in particular sub-Rule (1) read with sub-Rules 2
to 5 thereof empower an officer to direct the driver or any other person
in charge of a motor vehicle to submit the vehicle for a test to measure
the standards of emission in an authorised testing station and produce a
D certificate. The driver and/or the person in charge of the vehicle is obliged
to comply with such direction and the test is to be done with a meter of
the specification approved by the National Environmental Engineering
Research Institute (NEERI), Nagpur or approved by any agency specially
authorised in the Rules to do so.
E 25. The consequences of non-compliance of Rules 115(2) and (7)
are prescribed in sub-Rules (4) to (9) of Rule 116 of the Central Motor
Vehicle Rules.
26. The Green Tribunal Act, 2010 has been enacted to establish a
National Green Tribunal for the effective and expeditious disposal of
F cases relating, inter alia, to environmental protection and matters
connected therewith.
27. Section 2(1) (c) of the said Act defines environment to include
water, air and land and the inter-relationship, which exists among and
between water, air and land and human beings, other living creatures,
G plants, micro-organism and property.
28. Section 2(1) (m) defines “substantial question relating to
environment’ to include an instance where,—
(i) there is a direct violation of a specific statutory environmental
obligation by a person by which,—
H
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH v. CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT 1161
PROTECTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT [INDIRA BANERJEE, J.]
(A) the community at large other than an individual or group of A
individuals is affected or likely to be affected by the
environmental consequences; or
(B) the gravity of damage to the environment or property is
substantial; or
(C) the damage to public health is broadly measurable; B
(ii) the environmental consequences relate to a specific activity
or a point source of pollution;
29. Section 3 of the said Act provides:-
“Establishment of Tribunal: The Central Government shall, by C
notification, establish, with effect from such date as may be
specified therein, a Tribunal to be known as the National Green
Tribunal to exercise the jurisdiction, powers and authority conferred
on such Tribunal by or under this Act.”
30. The National Green Tribunal derives its jurisdiction to entertain D
and settle disputes from Section 14 of the said Act set out hereinbelow:-
“14. Tribunal to settle disputes
(1) The Tribunal shall have the jurisdiction over all civil cases
where a substantial question relating to environment (including
enforcement of any legal right relating to environment), is involved E
and such question arises out of the implementation of the
enactments specified in Schedule I.
(2) The Tribunal shall hear the disputes arising from the questions
referred to in sub-section (1) and settle such disputes and pass
order thereon. F
(3) No application for adjudication of dispute under this section
shall be entertained by the Tribunal unless it is made within a
period of six months from the date on which the cause of action
for such dispute first arose:
G
Provided that the Tribunal may, if it is satisfied that the applicant
was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the application within
the said period, allow it to be filed within a further period not
exceeding sixty days”.
H
1162 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 12 S.C.R.
A 31. Section 15 of the National Green Tribunal Act, which clothes
the National Green Tribunal with power to pass orders of relief,
compensation and restitution provides:-
“(1) The Tribunal may, by an order, provide,—
(a) relief and compensation to the victims of pollution and other
B environmental damage arising under the enactments specified in
the Schedule I (including accident occurring while handling any
hazardous substance);
(b) for restitution of property damaged;
C (c) for restitution of the environment for such area or areas, as
the Tribunal may think fit.
(2) The relief and compensation and restitution of property and
environment referred to in clauses (a), (b) and (c) of sub-
section (1) shall be in addition to the relief paid or payable under
D the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991 (6 of 1991).
(3) No application for grant of any compensation or relief or
restitution of property or environment under this section shall be
entertained by the Tribunal unless it is made within a period of
five years from the date on which the cause for such compensation
or relief first arose:
E
Provided that the Tribunal may, if it is satisfied that the applicant
was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the application within
the said period, allow it to be filed within a further period not
exceeding sixty days.
F (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.
G (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”.
32. Sections 19 and 20 of the said Act reads:-
H
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH v. CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT 1163
PROTECTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT [INDIRA BANERJEE, J.]
“19. Procedure and powers of Tribunal. A
(1) The Tribunal shall not be bound by the procedure laid down by
the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) but shall be guided
by the principles of natural justice.
(2) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Tribunal shall have
power to regulate its own procedure. B
(3) The Tribunal shall also not be bound by the rules of evidence
contained in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872).
(4) The Tribunal shall have, for the purposes of discharging its
functions under this Act, the same powers as are vested in a civil C
court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), while
trying a suit, in respect of the following matters, namely:—
(a) summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and
examining him on oath;
(b) requiring the discovery and production of documents; D
(c) receiving evidence on affidavits;
(d) subject to the provisions of sections 123 and 124 of the Indian
Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), requisitioning any public record
or document or copy of such record or document from any office;
E
(e) issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses or
documents;
(f) reviewing its decision;
(g) dismissing an application for default or deciding it ex parte;
F
(h) setting aside any order of dismissal of any application for default
or any order passed by it ex parte;
(i) pass an interim order (including granting an injunction or stay)
after providing the parties concerned an opportunity to be heard,
on any application made or appeal filed under this Act;
G
(j) pass an order requiring any person to cease and desist from
committing or causing any violation of any enactment specified in
Schedule I;
(k) any other matter which may be prescribed.
H
1164 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 12 S.C.R.
A (5) All proceedings before the Tribunal shall be deemed to be the
judicial proceedings within the meaning of sections 193, 219 and
228 for the purposes of section 196 of the Indian Penal Code (45
of 1860) and the Tribunal shall be deemed to be a civil court for
the purposes of section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974).
B
20. Tribunal to apply certain principles.
The Tribunal shall, while passing any order or decision or award,
apply the principles of sustainable development, the precautionary
principle and the polluter pays principle”.
C 33. Section 23 enables the Tribunal to make such order as to
costs as it may consider necessary and Section 24 empowers the Tribunal
to make an award for monetary compensation or relief on the ground of
damage to environment. An award or order or decision of the Tribunal
under the National Green Tribunal Act is executable as a decree of the
D Civil Court, by the Tribunal itself, for which purpose the Tribunal has all
the powers of a Civil Court. The Tribunal may also transmit any order or
award made by it to a Civil Court for execution.
34. The penalty for failure to comply with an award is prescribed
in Chapter IV of the Act containing Sections 26 and 28 relevant to this
E appeal are set out hereinbelow.
“26. Penalty for failure to comply with orders of Tribunal.
(1) Whoever, fails to comply with any order or award or decision
of the Tribunal under this Act, he shall be punishable with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with
F fine which may extend to ten crore rupees, or with both and in
case the failure or contravention continues, with additional fine
which may extend to twenty five thousand rupees for every day
during which such failure or contravention continues after
conviction for the first such failure or contravention:
G Provided that in case a company fails to comply with any order or
award or a decision of the Tribunal under this Act, such company
shall be punishable with fine which may extend to twenty-five
crore rupees, and in case the failure or contravention continues,
with additional fine which may extend to one lakh rupees for every
H
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH v. CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT 1165
PROTECTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT [INDIRA BANERJEE, J.]
day during which such failure or contravention continues after A
conviction for the first such failure or contravention.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) every offence under this Act shall be
deemed to be non-cognizable within the meaning of the said Code.
28. Offences by Government Department. B
(1) Where any Department of the Government fails to comply
with any order or award or decision of the Tribunal under this
Act, the Head of the Department shall be deemed to be guilty of
such failure and shall be liable to be proceeded against for having
committed an offence under this Act and punished accordingly: C
Provided that nothing contained in this section shall render such
Head of the Department liable to any punishment if he proves
that the offence was committed without his knowledge or that he
exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such
offence. D
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where
an offence under this Act has been committed by a Department
of the Government and 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 officer, other than the Head of the E
Department, such officer shall also be deemed to be guilty of that
offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished
accordingly”.
35. An appeal from a decision of the Tribunal lies to the Court
under Section 22 on one or more grounds specified in section 100 of the F
Code of Civil Procedure and/or in other words on a substantial question
of law. This Court does not, therefore, deem it necessary to examine the
correctness of any factual findings in the judgments and orders under
appeal.
36. The first two questions in this appeal, that is, whether the G
learned Tribunal could have issued orders on the appellant State
Government to direct and/or instruct and/or order dealers, outlets and
petrol pumps not to supply fuel to vehicles which did not have a valid
PUC Certificate and whether at all a vehicle not complying with the
requirement of displaying a valid PUC Certificate could be debarred
H
1166 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 12 S.C.R.
A from being supplied with fuel by any dealer or any outlet or petrol pump,
are dealt with together.
37. The Tribunal constituted under the NGT Act has jurisdiction
under Section 14 of the said Act to decide all civil cases where any
substantial question relating to environment including enforcement of
B any right relating to environment is involved and such question arises out
of the implementation of the enactments specified in Schedule I to the
said Act, which includes The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution)
Act, 1981 and the Environment Protection Act, 1986.
38. In view of the definition of “substantial question of environment
C in Section 2(m) of the NGT Act, the learned Tribunal can examine and
decide the question of violation of any specific statutory environmental
obligation, which affects or is likely to affect a group of individuals, or
the community at large.
39. For exercise of power under Section 14 of the NGT Act, a
D substantial question of law should be involved including any legal right to
environment and such question should arise out of implementation of the
specified enactments.
40. Violation of any specific statutory environmental obligation
gives rise to a substantial question of law and not just statutory obligations
E under the enactments specified in Schedule I. However, the question
must arise out of implementation of one or more of the enactments
specified in Schedule I.
41. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 may not be specified in Schedule
I to the NGT Act. However, the statutory 1989 Rules framed under the
F said Act casts statutory environmental obligations on manufacturers,
owners and others in control of motor vehicles, as also the State and
other statutory authorities under the said Act. The enforcement of the
statutory environmental obligations under the 1989 Rules, which is a
substantial question relating to environment, arises out of implementation
of the 1981 Act and the Environment Protection Act and, in particular,
G Section 20 of the 1981 Act which casts on the State Government the
mandatory duty to give instructions to the authorities in charge of
Registration of Motor Vehicles with a view to ensure compliance of the
standards of emission of our pollutants and Section 7 of the Environmental
Protection Act, which prohibits any person from carrying on any operation,
which would include operation of a motor vehicle, from discharging or
H
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH v. CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT 1167
PROTECTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT [INDIRA BANERJEE, J.]
emitting any environmental pollutants in excess of prescribed standards A
or permitting such discharge or emission.
42. On a combined reading of Sections 3, 7, 10, 11 and 23 of the
Environment Protection Act, with particular reference to Section 3(1),
3(2)(i)(a) and (b), 3(2) (iii, iv) and 3(2)(x) with Section 20 of the 1981
Act and Sections 14, read with 2(c), and 2(m) of the NGT Act and B
Rules 115 and 116 of the 1989 Rules, the learned Tribunal had the power,
authority and/or jurisdiction to direct the appellant State Government to
strictly implement the requirement of vehicles to possess and/or display
a valid PUC Certificate, and also to direct the appellant State Government
and/or the other authorities concerned to take penal action in accordance
with law, that is, Rules 115/116 of the 1989 Rules. C
43. On a purposive reading of Section 20 with Section 17(1)(g) of
the 1981 Act, the standards of emission prescribed by Rules 115 and 116
of the 1989 Rules attract Section 20 of the 1981 Act.
44. Under the 1989 Rules, it is mandatory for every motor vehicle D
to carry a valid pollution under control certificate issued by authorized
agency after the expiry of period of one year from the date on which the
Motor Vehicle was first registered.
45. On reading of Rule 115 of the 1989 Rules with Rule 116 the
failure to produce a PUC certificate entails the penalty of suspension of E
the Certificate of Registration.
46. Non production of pollution PUC certificate in contravention
of Rule 115(7) (2), as observed above, entails the penalty of suspension
of registration.
47. A perusal of Section 116 (9) makes it amply clear it may entail F
penalty under Rule 190(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act, which provides:
“190(2) Any person who drives or causes or allows to be driven,
in any public place a motor vehicle, which violates the standards
prescribed in relation to road safety, control of noise and air-
pollution, shall be punishable for the first offence with imprisonment G
for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine which
may extend to ten thousand rupees or with both and he shall be
disqualified for holding licence for a period of three months and
for any second or subsequent offence with imprisonment for a
H
1168 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 12 S.C.R.
A term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may
extend to ten thousand rupees or with both”.
48. It is amply clear that driving a vehicle without a pollution PUC
certificate entails (i) suspension of registration certificate; (ii)
imprisonment which may extend to three months; (iii) fine which may
B extend to Rs.10,000/- or both (iv) disqualification for holding licence for
a period of three months (v) imprisonment for a term which may extend
to six months or with fine which may extend to Rs.10,000/- or with fine.
49. A perusal of Rule 116(8) and (9) makes it amply clear that the
suspension of the certificate of registration is temporary. The suspension
C is until such time as a certificate is produced before the Registering
Authority certifying that the vehicle complies with sub Rules (2) and (7)
of the Rule 115 of the Central rules. A Certificate of Registration is also
to be deemed to have been suspended, until a fresh Pollution Under
Control certificate is obtained.
D 50. It is well settled that when a Statute or a Statutory Rules
prescribed a penalty for any act or omission, no other penalty not
contemplated in the Statute or a Statutory Rules can be imposed. It is
well settled that when Statute requires a thing to be done in a particular
manner, it is to be done only in that manner.
E 51. There can be no doubt that strong measures must be taken to
protect the environment and improve the air quality whenever there is
contravention of statutory rules causing environmental pollution. Stringent
action has to be taken, but in accordance with law.
52. Stoppage of supply of fuel to vehicles not complying with the
F requirement to have and/or display a valid PUC Certificate is not
contemplated either in the 1989 Rules or in the NGT Act. Motor Vehicles
not complying with the requirement of possessing and/or displaying a
valid PUC Certificate cannot be debarred from being supplied fuel.
53. In passing blanket direction, directing the appellant State
Government to ensure that no dealer and/or outlet and/or petrol pump
G
should supply fuel to vehicles without PUC Certificate, de hors the Central
Motor Vehicles Rules, the learned Tribunal overlooked the fact that no
vehicle can either be repaired to comply with pollution norms, nor tested
for compliance with the political norms upon repair, without fuel.
H
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH v. CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT 1169
PROTECTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT [INDIRA BANERJEE, J.]
54. This Court is, therefore, constrained to hold that the learned A
Tribunal had no power and/or authority and/or jurisdiction to pass orders
directing the Appellant State Government to issue orders, instructions or
directions on dealers, outlets and petrol pumps not to supply fuel to vehicles
without PUC Certificate. The first two questions are answered
accordingly.
B
55. The orders passed by the learned Tribunal are binding on and
enforceable against the Appellant State. As observed above, the learned
Tribunal had the power, authority and jurisdiction to direct the Appellant
State to strictly implement compliance with Rules 115 and 116. An order
of the Tribunal under the NGT Act is enforceable in the manner provided
in Section 25 of the NGT Act. C
56. There is no provision in the NGT Act for deposit of security to
secure compliance of an order of the Tribunal. The penalty for failure to
comply with an order of the Tribunal entails the penalty prescribed in
Sections 26 and 28 of the NGT Act.
D
57. Section 39 of the 1981 Act and Section 15 of the Environment
Protection Act pertain to penalty and/or punishment for contravention
of the provisions of the 1981 Act, and/or the Environment Protection
Act and the rules, orders and directions issued thereunder and Section
41 of the 1981 Act and Section 17 of the Environment Protection Act
governs offences by Government Departments. None of the provisions E
provide for monetary deposit to secure compliance of an order.
58. The learned Tribunal had no power and/or authority and/or
jurisdiction to direct the appellant State to deposit Rs.25 crores to secure
compliance with its order. In any case such an order should not have
been passed in review when the initial order did not contain any direction F
for security deposit. The third question is accordingly answered.
59. The appeals are thus allowed. The impugned judgments and
orders of the learned Tribunal are set aside to the extent that the learned
Tribunal has directed the Appellant State to make a deposit of Rs.25
crores by way of security and also to the extent that the learned Tribunal G
has directed the appellant State to issue orders and/or instructions and/
or directions on all dealers and/or outlets and/or petrol pumps not to
supply fuel to vehicles which do not comply with the requirement of
producing and/or displaying valid PUC Certificates.
H
1170 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 12 S.C.R.
A 60. The State appellant shall, however, strictly implement
compliance of Rules 115 and 116 of the Rules and penalize all those who
contravene the said Rules in accordance with the provisions of the 1989
Rules. The Registration Certificate of vehicles which do not possess a
valid PUC Certificate shall be forthwith suspended and/or cancelled,
and penal measures initiated against the owner and/or the person(s) in
B
possession and/or control of the offending vehicle, in accordance with
law.
Divya Pandey Appeals allowed.
C
D
E
F
G
H
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "National Green Tribunal"Sign in to search