The Supreme Court ruled that penalties under Section 26 of the NGT Act, 2010 cannot be imposed without proving willful disobedience by the accused. It held that the Mayor, not being a party to the original proceedings and lacking executive authority over waste management, could not be penalized for violations. However, the Municipal Corporation’s fine for environmental damage was upheld. The Court emphasized that strict construction of penal provisions is necessary and accepted the Mayor’s unconditional apology for remarks against the NGT, setting aside his punishment while clarifying the limits of liability under environmental laws
Facts Of The Case:
Procedural History:
The case originated from separate Original Applications filed before the National Green Tribunal (NGT) by Rayons-Enlighting Humanity, Invertis University, and residents of Village Razau Paraspur, Bareilly. These applications challenged the establishment and operation of a municipal solid waste management plant, a project of the Municipal Corporation, Bareilly, alleging violations of the Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2006. On May 28, 2013, the NGT directed that no municipal solid waste be dumped at the site while reserving its judgment. Subsequently, on July 18, 2013, the NGT allowed the applications, ordering the plant’s immediate closure and the removal of all municipal waste within four weeks. Following this, Civil Appeal No. 7215 of 2013 was filed before the Supreme Court, which stayed the NGT’s directions on September 13, 2013. Despite the NGT’s orders, continued dumping at the site led to new miscellaneous applications, converted into Original Applications by the NGT. Allegations were also made against Dr. I.S. Tomar, the then Mayor, for violating orders and making undesirable statements. On October 24, 2013, the NGT, accepting Dr. Tomar’s apology for his remarks, still found him and Commissioner Umesh Pratap Singh in intentional violation of its May 28 and July 18, 2013 orders. They were punished with civil imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5 lakhs each, while the Municipal Corporation was fined Rs. 1 lakh per day. This NGT judgment led to Civil Appeal Nos. 4599-4601 of 2014 and 5631-5633 of 2024 before the Supreme Court
READ ALSO : Legal Heir or Tenant? : Supreme Court Decides on Protracted Property Battle in Kerala
Court Observation:
The Supreme Court observed that Dr. I.S. Tomar was not a party to the original applications where the NGT’s orders of May 28, 2013, and July 18, 2013, were passed, and no notice was served to him. There was no material to show his responsibility for dumping municipal solid waste, nor any legal provision granting him executive power to direct the Municipal Corporation. The Court emphasized that Section 26 of the NGT Act, a penal provision, requires strict construction, and a person must have the power to prevent the prohibited act to be held accountable for non-compliance. Although Dr. Tomar’s public remarks scandalized the NGT, his unconditional apology was accepted. Therefore, with the apology accepted and no proven failure to comply, the Court concluded that Section 26 could not be invoked against him. For the Municipal Corporation, an admitted breach of the NGT’s order to remove waste was found, justifying the daily fine. However, the imprisonment and penalty against the Commissioner were not justified due to the lack of a finding of willful default.
Final Decision & Judgement:
The Supreme Court allowed Civil Appeal Nos. 4599-4601 of 2014, filed by Dr. I.S. Tomar, and set aside the directions against him in Clause (ii) of paragraph 45 of the impugned National Green Tribunal (NGT) judgment. Additionally, Civil Appeal Nos. 5631-5633 of 2024 were partly allowed, with the directions against Shri Umesh Pratap Singh in Clause (ii) of paragraph 45 of the impugned NGT judgment also being set aside. However, the Supreme Court explicitly stated that no other part of the impugned NGT judgment was disturbed. This means the fine of Rs. 1 lakh per day imposed on the Municipal Corporation, Bareilly, for causing degradation to the environment and injury to public health was upheld
Case Details:
Case Title: Dr. I.S. TOMAR V. INVERTIS UNIVERSITY & ORS. Citation: 2025 INSC 775 Civil Appeal Nos.: 4599-4601 OF 2014 Date of Judgment: May 23, 2025 Judges/Justice Name: Abhay S. Oka and Augustine George Masih
Download The Judgement Here