The Supreme Court of India has set aside orders passed by the National Green Tribunal (NGT), allowing the establishment of a petrol pump that had been stalled for nearly six years due to prolonged litigation.
The bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice K. Vinod Chandran found serious fault with the approach adopted by the NGT. It held that the Tribunal had abdicated its statutory duty by delegating core adjudicatory functions to expert committees instead of deciding the matter itself.
The case arose after a private individual approached the NGT alleging that a proposed petrol pump violated siting guidelines issued by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB). The objection was based on proximity to a gas agency, a play school, and nearby residential areas, purportedly breaching the prescribed minimum distance norms.
The NGT, while considering the matter, relied on the “precautionary principle” and initially kept the No Objection Certificates (NOCs) in abeyance. It also constituted a joint committee to examine compliance with environmental norms, effectively deferring its adjudicatory role.
The Court reiterated that while expert committees may assist judicial bodies, final adjudication must rest with the tribunal or court, especially in an adversarial system governed by principles of natural justice.
The Court noted that the NGT’s initial order lacked substantive findings and merely shifted responsibility to a committee. A subsequent execution order was passed without issuing notice to affected parties, violating fundamental principles of natural justice. The Tribunal failed to properly evaluate multiple reports, including those indicating compliance with applicable guidelines.
Examining the reports on record, the Court observed that the proposed site was located in a commercial area as per the applicable Master Plan, and not within a designated residential zone under local laws.
The court found that the presence of isolated residences or nearby structures did not automatically violate CPCB norms. The alleged play school was no longer operational. There was no evidence of breach of the prescribed distance criteria when assessed in light of zoning regulations.
Importantly, the Court held that mere apprehensions of environmental harm without supporting data or analysis cannot justify denial of a lawful commercial activity.
The Supreme Court also raised concerns regarding the locus standi of the original applicant before the NGT. It noted that there was no clear indication that the individual was directly affected by the project, suggesting the possibility of motivated litigation.
The Court described the case as one where a “busy body” had stalled a public utility project, resulting in undue hardship to entrepreneurs and delay in public service delivery.
Setting aside the NGT’s orders dated February 1, 2021, and November 11, 2022, the Supreme Court allowed the appeals filed by Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and others.
Rather than remanding the matter, the Court directed the District Magistrate, Haridwar to reconsider the issue afresh, taking into account current statutory requirements. It further ordered that the petrol pump be permitted if found compliant with applicable laws.
Case Details
Case Title: Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Versus Deepak Sharma and Ors.
Citation: JURISHOUR-260-SC-2026
Case No.: Civil Appeal No.3042 of 2023
Date: 23/03/2026
Read More: GST | 2 Demand Notices Can’t Be Created For One Order: Allahabad HC
