13. National Environment Tribunal and National Environment Appellate Authority | The Forerunners of the NGT

This is the 13th post in Environmental Law, Unit III — the previous post covered the pollution control authorities and the National Green Tribunal; this post covers two earlier bodies that the syllabus names, which led to the NGT.

The Problem This Topic Solves

Environmental disputes involve technical evidence such as emission data and impact assessments, which ordinary civil courts handle slowly. India's courts and the legislature therefore began creating specialised bodies. The National Environment Tribunal (NET) and the National Environment Appellate Authority (NEAA) were the first such bodies created by statute. Students need to know what each did and why neither survived.

National Environment Tribunal Act, 1995

• Purpose — to give strict, no-fault liability and quick compensation for damage caused by accidents while handling any hazardous substance. It was linked to the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991.
• Coverage — death, injury and damage to property or the environment caused by such accidents.
• Liability — the owner handling the hazardous substance was liable on a no-fault basis, so the victim did not have to prove negligence.
• Appeal — lay to the Supreme Court under Section 24, within 90 days, on the grounds in Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
• Position — the Tribunal was provided for in the Act but was never actually set up and made functional.

National Environment Appellate Authority Act, 1997

• Purpose — to hear appeals against the grant of environmental clearance to industries and projects in areas where restrictions apply under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.
• Who could appeal — persons affected by the clearance, including local residents and environmental groups.
• Position — the Authority did function, but its jurisdiction was narrow, limited to appeals on clearance, and it had no wider powers over environmental damage and compensation.

Why They Gave Way to the NGT

The Supreme Court stressed the need for environmental courts with judicial and technical members in A.P. Pollution Control Board v. Prof. M.V. Nayudu, and the Law Commission made similar recommendations. The National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 then created the National Green Tribunal with wider jurisdiction over all civil cases involving substantial environmental questions under the listed environmental laws. The NGT Act repealed the National Environment Tribunal Act, 1995 and the National Environment Appellate Authority Act, 1997.

• NET Act, 1995: no-fault compensation for accidents with hazardous substances; appeal to the Supreme Court; the Tribunal was never made functional.
• NEAA Act, 1997: appeals against environmental clearance; functioned but with narrow jurisdiction.
• Both were repealed by the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.
• The NGT combines judicial and expert members and has wide jurisdiction over environmental disputes.

• The NET Act was meant to work alongside the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991, which requires insurance for handling hazardous substances.
• The reasoning in Nayudu that environmental bodies need both judicial and scientific input is reflected in the NGT's mixed membership.
• Exam trap: do not describe the NET and NEAA as the same body; one dealt with compensation for accidents, the other with appeals on clearance.

A Practical Example

Suppose a chemical plant clears an environmental assessment and local villagers object. Under the NEAA Act they could appeal the clearance to the Authority. If instead a toxic gas leak injured them, the NET Act would have given no-fault compensation. Today both kinds of dispute go to the National Green Tribunal.

Quick Revision Points

• NET Act, 1995: hazardous substance accidents, no-fault compensation, appeal to the Supreme Court; never functional.
• NEAA Act, 1997: appeals against environmental clearance; functioned, narrow jurisdiction.
• Both repealed by the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.
• Supreme Court's push for environmental courts with expert members: Nayudu case.