Supreme Court Sets Aside NGT Action in Rushikonda Resort Case When High Court Was Already Seized of Matter
Background of the Dispute
The controversy in State of Andhra Pradesh Vs Raghu Ramakrishna Raju Kanumuru (M.P.) arose from reconstruction of a resort project at Rushikonda Hill near Visakhapatnam in the State of Andhra Pradesh. The State authorities, after securing approvals, demolished an existing resort and began constructing a new resort with additional facilities at the same location.
While this redevelopment was underway, environmental concerns were raised, leading to parallel proceedings before:
- The High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, and
- The National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (NGT).
The overlap between these proceedings and the conflicting interim directions issued by the High Court and the NGT ultimately led to the present appeals before the Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No(S). 45224524 of 2022, decided on 01/06/2022.
Proceedings Before the High Court
A public interest litigation, W.P. (P.I.L.) No.241 of 2021, was instituted before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, challenging the construction activity at Rushikonda Hill. The petition was filed on 8th December 2021.
On 16th December 2021, a Division Bench of the High Court passed an interim order, permitting the construction to continue, but with strict conditions. The operative part of the order required that:
construction activities and all related works could only proceed in conformity with the permission granted by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, and must adhere to the existing master plan.
Thus, the High Court explicitly allowed the project to go ahead, subject to compliance with environmental permission and planning norms. The High Court, a constitutional court, was therefore already seized of the very same project and its environmental implications.
Proceedings Before the NGT
Even before the High Court PIL was filed, the respondent, a sitting Member of Parliament from Andhra Pradesh, had addressed a letter dated 31st October 2021 to the NGT raising objections to the project. Acting on this letter, the NGT, Principal Bench, New Delhi, initiated O.A. No.361 of 2021.
First Experts Committee and Its Findings
On 17th December 2021, the NGT constituted an Experts Committee comprising four experts to examine whether the project violated environmental norms. The Committee submitted its report on 29th March 2022. A reading of the report showed:
- The Committee did not find any violations in the construction carried out by the appellant State.
- No adverse environmental breach was reported by this first Committee.
Second Experts Committee and Interim Restraint
Despite the first report being exculpatory for the project proponent, the NGT, by an order dated 6th May 2022, proceeded to:
- Appoint a second Experts Committee, and
- Direct that no further construction should be undertaken at the site pending further orders.
Subsequently, when the appellant sought vacation of this stay by filing I.A. Nos.117 and 118 of 2022 in O.A. No.361 of 2021, the NGT, by order dated 20th May 2022, declined to lift the restraint.
Thus, while the High Court had allowed construction to proceed subject to conditions, the NGT had effectively stopped all further construction work—creating two inconsistent directions in respect of the same project.
Appeals Before the Supreme Court
The State of Andhra Pradesh approached the Supreme Court of India challenging both NGT orders dated 6th May 2022 and 20th May 2022. The central question before the Supreme Court was not the environmental merits of the project, but whether the NGT could continue to exercise jurisdiction in respect of a matter already being considered by the jurisdictional High Court.
Submissions on Behalf of the Appellant State
**Dr.