High Court sets aside NGT order

​Hyderabad: In a major relief to the Telangana State government, the High Court at Hyderabad has set aside the order passed by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) stopping all construction activity undertaken for Palamuru-Ranga Reddy Lift Irrigation Project in the forest as well as non-forest areas in the Narlapoor-Anjanagiri Balancing Reservoir area of Mahabubnagar district.

The division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Ramesh Ranganathan and Justice A Shankar Narayan passed this order on Tuesday while hearing a writ petition filed by the State of Telangana seeking quashing of the NGT order on the grounds that it was an ex-parte order passed without giving an opportunity to the State of Telangana to present its version.

The bench while setting aside the NGT order, however directed the Telangana State government to carry out only those works relating to drinking water supply under the Palamuru-Ranga Reddy Lift Irrigation Project for a period of one year.

The irrigation related works under the project can be undertaken only after obtaining necessary clearances relating to environment and wildlife protection under the relevant statutes, the bench made it clear.

Telangana Advocate General K Ramakrishna Reddy in his arguments cited judgment of Kerala High Court wherein it was held that the NGT has no jurisdiction to pass interim order without hearing the concerned parties.

He also said the application of B Harshvardhan Reddy before the NGT itself was not maintainable as it was past limitation period and no condone delay petition was filed.

Referring to the lack of necessary clearances from Environment Ministry of Government of India, the AG asserted that those would required when irrigation project works are undertaken whereas in the present case, the government was only undertaking works for provision of drinking water to Mahabubnagar and Nalgonda districts.

He alleged that various PILs and writ petitions are being filed, including two by former minister Nagam Janardhan Reddy, to stall this important project and this application before NGT was part of this.

The bench remarked that it was the privilege of the counsel to file any number of cases and he or she had freedom to do so.

The AG, after obtaining instructions, informed the bench that the activities being carried out under the project are outside the boundaries of Amrabad Reserve Forest area.

Counsel for the petitioner B Rachna Reddy made a preliminary objection to the writ petition saying it was not maintainable because Section 22 of the NGT Act clearly stipulated that an appeal against any order of NGT lies with Supreme Court.

She also asserted that the NGT had the right to pass an ex-parte order and it did not over-reach itself in this matter. She has also informed that the Standing Counsel for Telangana government in NGT, Chennai bench was informed of the hearing but had not attended it.

The bench questioned whether e-mail communication would amount to serving of notice on the Telangana government.

She also informed the bench that the State government was continuing the works in disregard to the stay order granted by the NGT and they were in contempt.

The stay granted by NGT was up to January 17. The bench directed that the merits of the case would be taken up by the NGT during the course of hearing.