NGT bins plea challenging judge’s son as amicus curiae in water pollution case

The tribunal ordered that the case be transferred to a bench presided over by Justice Arun Kumar Tyagi, as the matter had previously been part-heard by that bench.
NGT bins plea challenging judge’s son as amicus curiae in water pollution case
Updated on
2 min read

NEW DELHI: The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has dismissed a plea seeking the transfer of a water pollution case from a bench headed by Justice Sudhir Agarwal.

The petition raised concerns of “political bias” as Justice Agarwal’s son, advocate Gaurav Agarwal, has been appointed as the amicus curiae in several NGT cases, despite “not practising regularly before the tribunal.”

A bench comprising Justice Sudhir Agarwal and Dr. Afroz Ahmad rejected the plea filed by advocate Gaurav Kumar Bansal, calling the accusations of “bias” and an attempt at “forum shopping” and “bench hunting.”

The tribunal emphasised that mere allegations or complaints, without credible evidence, could not justify a judge’s recusal. “This kind of practice in judicial institutions is well-known and is referred to as ‘forum shopping’ or ‘bench hunting,’” the tribunal stated in its order.

The plea argued that the appointment was “inappropriate”, given Agarwal’s “limited experience” in environmental law, and questioned why Justice Agarwal did not recuse himself from these cases.

In addition, the plea highlighted “procedural delays”, alleging that Justice Agarwal often began hearings well “after the scheduled time” of 10:30 am. The applicant claimed that complaints regarding these delays, submitted to NGT chairperson Justice Prakash Shrivastava, were “ignored.”

The tribunal, however, stated that Bansal had no issue appearing before the same bench in other matters, indicating a selective and non-genuine approach. The court cited established legal precedents, including the Supreme Court’s rulings in Indore Development Authority vs. Manohar Lal and State of Punjab vs. Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar, to underline that apprehensions of bias must be supported by objective facts, not subjective perceptions.

The tribunal clarified that such appointments are made as part of judicial discretion in the interest of justice and do not indicate favoritism. It also noted that Agarwal has been practising before the NGT since 2016, countering claims of his inexperience.

The tribunal ordered that the case be transferred to a bench presided over by Justice Arun Kumar Tyagi, as the matter had previously been part-heard by that bench. The court also noted an administrative error in the case being listed before Justice Agarwal’s bench, which contributed to the confusion.

‘Judicial discretion’

The tribunal clarified that such appointments are made as part of judicial discretion in the interest of justice and do not indicate favouritism. It also noted that advocate Gaurav Agarwal, the amicus curiae has been practising before the National Green Tribunal (NGT) since 2016, countering claims of his inexperience.

Related Stories

No stories found.

X
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com