Madras HC stays appointment of former Chief Secretary to National Green Tribunal
[ad_1]
The Madras High Court on Friday stayed the operation of an order handed by the Centre on December 12, 2020, appointing former Tamil Nadu Chief Secretary Girija Vaidyanathan as an Expert Member of the National Green Tribunal (NGT). The interim keep was granted after it was reported to the court docket that she had deliberate to take cost on April 19.
Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy wrote that public curiosity litigant R. Sundarrajan of the environmental NGO Poovulagin Nanbargal, represented by counsel M. Radhakrishnan, had “prima facie made out a strong case that the third respondent [Ms. Vaidyanathan] does not meet the eligibility criteria for being appointed as an Expert Member of the NGT”.
The judges stated the former Chief Secretary didn’t seem to have 5 years of expertise in coping with environmental issues both within the Central authorities or in a State authorities or in any nationwide or State establishment, as stipulated below Section 5(2)(b) of the NGT Act, 2010.
The first Division Bench identified that the Act lists the {qualifications} required to be appointed because the Chairperson, Judicial Member in addition to Expert Member of NGT. According to the regulation, the Expert Member will need to have had administrative expertise of 15 years, together with 5 years in coping with environmental issues within the Central or State authorities or in a reputed nationwide or State establishment.
There was no dispute that Ms. Vaidyanathan had 15 years of administrative expertise. However, her expertise in atmosphere issues appeared to be uncertain, the judges stated. They identified that even in her counter-affidavit, she had claimed to have served as Environment and Forest Secretary between December 2001 and August 2002 and as chairperson of the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board between November 2003 and May 2005.
“It is evident that the third respondent has more than three-and-a-half years’ experience in dealing with environmental matters… It is possible that the third respondent may have dealt with environmental matters in course of the various other departments that she headed or was attached with, but it is necessary for her to indicate the same for the court to be satisfied that the statutory eligibility criterion in such regard is met by her,” the Bench noticed.
More importantly, data with respect to her having handled environmental issues whereas heading different departments will need to have been obtainable with the choice panel which selected her.
Though the Act had not particularly outlined the expression, ‘environmental matters’, the judges agreed with Mr. Radhakrishnan that the court docket might take its cue from Section 5(2(a) whereby sensible expertise in air pollution management, hazardous substance administration, atmosphere influence evaluation, local weather change administration, organic variety administration and forest conservation had been listed as {qualifications} for appointment as an Expert Member.
[ad_2]
