Evaluation of India's National Green Tribunal in Managing Climate-Related Environmental Disputes

Journal of Research and Development Peer Reviewed International, Open Access Journal. ISSN : 2230-9578 | Website: https://jrdrvb.org Volume-17, Issue-9(III) | Sept. - 2025 249 Evaluation of India’s National Green Tribunal in Managing Climate-Related Environmental Disputes Manisha Baliram Pohare1, Dr. Vinod Kumar 2 1Ph. D. Research Scholar, Department of Law, Shri Jagdish Prasad Jhabarmal Tibrewala University, Vidyanagari, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan, India 2Ph.D. Guide, Department of Law, Shri Jagdish Prasad Jhabarmal Tibrewala University, Vidyanagar, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan, India Manuscript ID: JRD -2025(I)-170944 ISSN: 2230-9578 Volume 17 Issue 9(III)| Pp 249-260 Sept. 2025 Submitted: 12 Aug. 2025 Revised: 22 Aug. 2025 Accepted: 20 Sept. 2025 Published: 30 Sept. 2025 Abstract The National Green Tribunal (NGT), established under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, serves as a specialized judicial body to expeditiously address environmental disputes in India. As climate change increasingly affects ecosystems, livelihoods, and public health, the NGT’s role in managing climate-related environmental disputes has become critical. This study evaluates the Tribunal’s efficiency, accessibility, and effectiveness in mitigating the legal and ecological impacts of climate change. Through a detailed analysis of landmark judgments, procedural mechanisms, and policy outcomes, the research highlights how the NGT has shaped environmental governance and climate jurisprudence in India. While the Tribunal has contributed significantly to environmental protection and judicial activism, challenges persist in enforcement, coordination with executive agencies, and scientific capacity. The study concludes that the NGT remains a cornerstone of India’s environmental governance but requires institutional strengthening to address the emerging complexities of climate change litigation. Keywords National Green Tribunal (NGT), Climate Change, Environmental Law, Environmental Justice, Judicial Activism, Climate Litigation, Sustainable Development, Environmental Governance, Climate Disputes, Legal Framework Introduction Climate change has emerged as one of the most profound global challenges of the twenty-first century, altering weather patterns, intensifying natural disasters, and threatening socio-economic stability. In India—a country with diverse ecosystems and a large population dependent on climate-sensitive sectors—the effects of rising temperatures, erratic rainfall, and increased pollution are acutely felt. The traditional judicial system often faced difficulties in handling environmental cases due to delays, lack of expertise, and procedural complexities. Recognizing this gap, the Government of India established the National Green Tribunal (NGT) under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, with the primary objective of providing effective and expeditious disposal of cases related to environmental protection and conservation of natural resources. The NGT’s jurisdiction extends to matters concerning the enforcement of legal rights related to the environment and the compensation for damages caused by environmental degradation. Over the past decade, the Tribunal has emerged as a vital institution addressing issues such as deforestation, air and water pollution, waste management, and climate-related impacts. The NGT’s interventions have led to significant policy reforms, halted environmentally hazardous projects, and strengthened public participation in environmental governance. However, as climate-related disputes become more complex—ranging from industrial emissions and deforestation to coastal erosion and urban flooding—the Tribunal faces new challenges in evidence evaluation, policy integration, and enforcement. Quick Response Code: Website: https://jrdrvb.org/ DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.16885235 Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International Public License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work noncommercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations ae licensed under the idential terms. Address for correspondence: Manisha Baliram Pohare,Ph. D. Research Scholar, Department of Law, Shri Jagdish Prasad Jhabarmal Tibrewala University, Vidyanagari, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan, India How to cite this article: M. B.Pohare, V.Kumar .(2025). Evaluation of India’s National Green Tribunal in Managing Climate-Related Environmental Disputes. Journal of Research & Development, 17(9(III)249260 Original Article Journal of Research and Development Peer Reviewed International, Open Access Journal. ISSN : 2230-9578 | Website: https://jrdrvb.org Volume-17, Issue-9(III) | Sept. - 2025 250 This study aims to evaluate the NGT’s performance in managing these evolving climate-related disputes, assessing its effectiveness, limitations, and potential reforms to enhance India’s climate governance framework. In the 21st century, the world faces an unprecedented ecological crisis—one marked by global temperature rise, erratic weather patterns, frequent natural disasters, and large-scale environmental degradation. These transformations, largely induced by anthropogenic activities, have triggered what the scientific community recognizes as the age of climate emergency. Nations across the globe are grappling with the complex interplay of economic growth, environmental sustainability, and social equity. India, with its vast geographical expanse, rich biodiversity, and densely populated regions, stands at the epicenter of this crisis. The country’s vulnerability to climate change is evident from recurrent floods, droughts, rising sea levels, heatwaves, and biodiversity loss, all of which profoundly affect human health, agriculture, water resources, and livelihoods. Environmental governance in India has evolved through a combination of legislative frameworks, judicial interventions, and administrative mechanisms. However, the increasing frequency and complexity of environmental disputes—especially those intertwined with climate change—have tested the efficacy of existing legal institutions. The traditional court system, though powerful in scope, often suffers from procedural delays, lack of specialized expertise, and a backlog of cases. Recognizing the need for a specialized forum capable of addressing environmental and climate issues swiftly and effectively, the Government of India established the National Green Tribunal (NGT) under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. The establishment of the NGT marked a significant milestone in India’s environmental jurisprudence, representing a paradigm shift toward specialized environmental adjudication. The Tribunal was designed to ensure the effective and expeditious disposal of environmental cases and to enforce the legal rights related to the environment, providing relief and compensation for damages. The NGT’s jurisdiction extends to all civil cases where a substantial question relating to the environment is involved and is linked to the implementation of laws such as the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, and Biological Diversity Act, 2002. The Tribunal operates with a multidisciplinary approach, bringing together both judicial and expert members from scientific, environmental, and technical backgrounds. This institutional design makes the NGT uniquely positioned to address the complexities of modern environmental disputes that require both legal reasoning and scientific understanding. The NGT has thus emerged as a central player in India’s environmental governance, adjudicating thousands of cases involving pollution control, waste management, mining, forest conservation, biodiversity protection, and increasingly, climate-related disputes. Climate change litigation represents a new frontier in environmental adjudication. As India experiences the adverse impacts of rising global temperatures, issues such as glacier retreat in the Himalayas, desertification in Rajasthan, groundwater depletion, and severe air pollution in urban centers have triggered climate-linked legal battles. The NGT’s role in these matters is crucial as it not only decides disputes but also shapes policy directions, interprets environmental principles, and enforces accountability on both government and private actors. Through its judgments, the Tribunal has invoked key environmental principles such as the precautionary principle, the polluter pays principle, and the principle of sustainable development, thereby embedding environmental ethics within the fabric of Indian law. One of the notable achievements of the NGT has been its proactive stance in cases related to air and water pollution, deforestation, waste management, and ecological restoration. Landmark cases such as Vardhaman Kaushik v. Union of India (2014), addressing Delhi’s air pollution crisis; Almitra H. Patel v. Union of India (2000–2016), dealing with municipal solid waste management; and Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti v. Union of India (2017), concerning industrial effluent discharge, demonstrate how the Tribunal has contributed significantly to environmental jurisprudence. In each of these cases, the NGT’s decisions have had direct implications for climate change mitigation and adaptation by ensuring stricter enforcement of environmental laws, encouraging cleaner technologies, and strengthening compliance mechanisms. However, the effectiveness of the NGT in managing climate-related disputes is not without contention. Critics point to several institutional and procedural limitations, such as the Tribunal’s dependency on executive agencies for enforcement, lack of adequate technical infrastructure, limited regional accessibility, and absence of explicit legislative mandates for climate change adjudication. Moreover, climate-related disputes are inherently complex, often requiring interdisciplinary expertise that bridges atmospheric science, environmental economics, and law. The NGT’s capacity to integrate such knowledge into its decisions remains an evolving challenge. From a socio-legal perspective, the NGT embodies the convergence of environmental protection, human rights, and sustainable development. The right to a clean and healthy environment, derived from Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, has been upheld repeatedly by the Indian judiciary as a fundamental human right. The NGT, through its decisions, reinforces this constitutional mandate, ensuring that environmental degradation and climate inaction are treated as violations of human rights. This aligns with India’s international obligations under global environmental conventions, including the Paris Agreement (2015), the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). In the last decade, the NGT has been both celebrated and scrutinized. On one hand, it has been lauded for democratizing environmental governance, providing an accessible platform for citizens, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and affected communities to seek justice. On the other hand, questions persist regarding its Journal of Research and Development Peer Reviewed International, Open Access Journal. ISSN : 2230-9578 | Website: https://jrdrvb.org Volume-17, Issue-9(III) | Sept. - 2025 251 actual impact on ground-level environmental outcomes. Many of its landmark orders have faced delays or partial implementation due to bureaucratic inertia, lack of inter-agency coordination, or political resistance. Consequently, evaluating the NGT’s real-world effectiveness in managing climate-related environmental disputes becomes both necessary and urgent. This evaluation is particularly relevant given India’s growing vulnerability to climate-induced risks. The increasing intensity of floods, droughts, cyclones, and heatwaves demands a legal and institutional mechanism that is not only reactive but also preventive and adaptive. The NGT, by virtue of its statutory mandate and judicial authority, holds immense potential to become the legal backbone of India’s climate governance strategy. Assessing its performance therefore involves understanding how effectively it translates environmental principles into actionable policies, ensures compliance, and contributes to national and global climate goals. Moreover, the NGT’s functioning needs to be analyzed in the context of India’s broader environmental governance ecosystem, which includes agencies like the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC), Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs), and various local authorities. The Tribunal’s ability to coordinate with these bodies and ensure effective implementation of its orders determines its success in addressing climate-related challenges. In light of these considerations, this study seeks to critically evaluate the role of the National Green Tribunal in managing climate-related environmental disputes in India. It explores the Tribunal’s achievements, identifies its structural and operational shortcomings, and proposes actionable recommendations to enhance its effectiveness. By examining the intersection of law, policy, and climate science, this research contributes to the growing field of climate jurisprudence and provides insights into how India can strengthen its institutional capacity to face the realities of a changing climate. Ultimately, the evaluation of the NGT is not merely a legal inquiry—it is a reflection of India’s broader commitment to environmental stewardship, intergenerational equity, and sustainable development. In an era where climate change transcends borders, sectors, and disciplines, the NGT stands as both a symbol and an instrument of environmental justice. Its evolution, therefore, holds the key to understanding how law and governance can adapt to protect the planet and secure a livable future for generations to come. Definitions of Present Research Study 1. National Green Tribunal (NGT): A specialized judicial body established in India to handle environmental disputes involving multi-disciplinary issues. 2. Climate-Related Disputes: Legal cases or conflicts arising from or influenced by the impacts of climate change, such as pollution, deforestation, and environmental degradation. 3. Environmental Justice: Fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people in environmental decisionmaking processes. 4. Sustainable Development: Development that meets present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. 5. Environmental Governance: The set of regulatory processes, mechanisms, and organizations that influence environmental actions and outcomes. Need of the Study of Present Research Study The growing number of climate-related disasters in India has heightened the need for an efficient legal mechanism capable of addressing environmental grievances swiftly and scientifically. Traditional courts often lack specialized expertise and time-bound processes to handle such disputes effectively. The NGT, as a specialized body, provides a unique opportunity to evaluate whether it has fulfilled its mandate in this changing climate context. There is a pressing need to assess its operational efficiency, its impact on environmental policy, and its role in achieving climate justice and sustainability in India. Aims of Present Research Study 1. To critically evaluate the functioning of the National Green Tribunal in managing and resolving climate-related environmental disputes in India. Objectives of Present Research Study 1. To analyze the legal framework and jurisdiction of the NGT concerning climate-related disputes. 2. To study landmark cases where the NGT has addressed climate and environmental issues. 3. To evaluate the NGT’s effectiveness in enforcing environmental compliance. 4. To identify institutional and procedural challenges faced by the NGT. 5. To suggest policy and structural reforms for strengthening climate-related dispute resolution in India. Hypothesis of Present Research Study 1. The National Green Tribunal has significantly contributed to the advancement of environmental justice in India, yet its effectiveness in managing climate-related disputes remains constrained by institutional, procedural, and enforcement limitations. Literature Search of Present Research Study Several studies and legal reviews have explored the NGT’s performance in environmental adjudication. 1. Cullet (2011) examined the emergence of environmental courts and their relevance in Indian law. 2. Divan and Rosencranz (2012) highlighted how judicial activism has shaped India’s environmental policy. Journal of Research and Development Peer Reviewed International, Open Access Journal. ISSN : 2230-9578 | Website: https://jrdrvb.org Volume-17, Issue-9(III) | Sept. - 2025 252 3. Sharma (2015) analyzed case outcomes from the NGT, emphasizing its effectiveness in reducing procedural delays. 4. Rajamani (2017) discussed climate litigation trends and the evolving role of NGT in addressing transboundary environmental issues. 5. Reports by the Centre for Policy Research (2019) and TERI (2020) evaluated the NGT’s institutional efficiency and the need for enhanced scientific and technical capacity. 6. The UN Environment Programme (UNEP, 2021) noted India’s proactive judicial approach to environmental governance, with the NGT serving as a global model for specialized tribunals. Research Methodology of Present Research Study The study employs a qualitative and analytical research design based on both doctrinal and empirical approaches: 1. Primary Sources: Statutory provisions, NGT judgments, environmental policies, and acts. 2. Secondary Sources: Research articles, law reviews, government reports, and climate policy documents. 3. Case Study Approach: Analysis of landmark cases such as Vardhaman Kaushik vs. Union of India (Air Pollution), Almitra H. Patel vs. Union of India (Solid Waste Management), and Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti vs. Union of India (Water Pollution). 4. Data Collection: Examination of NGT orders (2010–2024), environmental statistics, and policy reforms influenced by the Tribunal. 5. Analytical Tools: Comparative legal analysis, policy evaluation, and content analysis of judicial reasoning. Strong Points of Present Research Study The National Green Tribunal (NGT) stands as one of the most progressive and specialized judicial innovations in India’s post-independence environmental governance framework. It embodies the nation’s commitment to environmental justice, climate accountability, and sustainable development. Over the years, the Tribunal has evolved as a formidable force in shaping India’s environmental jurisprudence. The following strong points illustrate the multidimensional strengths of the NGT in managing climate-related environmental disputes. 1. Specialized Environmental Adjudication with Expert Composition One of the NGT’s greatest strengths lies in its specialized structure. Unlike conventional courts, the Tribunal combines judicial members (retired judges) with expert members possessing scientific, environmental, and technical knowledge. This composition ensures that complex disputes involving pollution, ecological degradation, or climate impacts are examined through both legal and scientific lenses. The Tribunal’s ability to understand technical data— such as emission levels, ecological impact assessments, and environmental indicators—enables it to render informed, balanced, and evidence-based judgments that ordinary courts might struggle to deliver. 2. Speedy and Accessible Justice Mechanism The NGT was designed to deliver “effective and expeditious disposal” of environmental cases, as mandated by Section 20 of the NGT Act, 2010. It functions with simplified procedures, allowing aggrieved citizens, NGOs, and affected communities to approach it directly without the procedural rigidity of conventional litigation. This accessibility has democratized environmental justice, especially for marginalized communities suffering from pollution or displacement. The Tribunal’s orders are time-bound, ensuring that climate-related cases—where delays could worsen damage—receive urgent attention. 3. Enforcement of Foundational Environmental Principles The Tribunal has effectively operationalized key international and domestic environmental principles, including: 1. The Precautionary Principle: Advocating preventive action in cases of uncertain scientific outcomes. 2. The Polluter Pays Principle: Holding industries financially responsible for the damage they cause. 3. The Principle of Sustainable Development: Ensuring economic growth is compatible with environmental conservation. Through these principles, the NGT integrates legal philosophy with ecological ethics, influencing not only dispute resolution but also public policy formulation and administrative accountability. 4. Promotion of Environmental and Climate Justice The NGT plays a vital role in safeguarding environmental justice, which extends beyond mere legal remedies to include social and ecological fairness. It has consistently upheld the right to a clean and healthy environment as an extension of the Right to Life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. By ensuring that environmental harms—such as air pollution, deforestation, and industrial contamination—are addressed promptly, the Tribunal provides voice and remedy to vulnerable communities. It has also recognized intergenerational equity, thereby protecting the interests of future generations affected by climate change. 5. Landmark Judgments Influencing Policy and Governance The Tribunal’s jurisprudence has significantly influenced India’s environmental and climate policies. Cases such as: 1. Vardhaman Kaushik vs. Union of India (Air Pollution Control), 2. Almitra H. Patel vs. Union of India (Waste Management), and 3. Sterlite Industries Case (Industrial Pollution) Journal of Research and Development Peer Reviewed International, Open Access Journal. ISSN : 2230-9578 | Website: https://jrdrvb.org Volume-17, Issue-9(III) | Sept. - 2025 253 4. have compelled government authorities to adopt stricter emission norms, improve waste management systems, and monitor industrial compliance. These judgments have contributed to the mainstreaming of environmental governance into national development policy, demonstrating how judicial reasoning can catalyze administrative reform. 6. Encouragement of Public Participation and Citizen Empowerment The NGT has democratized environmental governance by allowing public interest litigations (PILs) and petitions from civil society organizations, environmental activists, and even individuals. This participatory model reflects the Tribunal’s recognition that environmental protection is a collective responsibility. It empowers communities to hold both private and public actors accountable for environmental harm, thus enhancing transparency and accountability in governance. 7. Judicial Activism and Progressive Environmental Jurisprudence The NGT is known for its proactive judicial approach, interpreting environmental laws in light of evolving global and national challenges. It has expanded the definition of environmental harm to include climate-related risks, ecosystem imbalance, and public health impacts. The Tribunal’s assertive stance—often compelling reluctant government departments to act—has fostered an era of judicial activism that prioritizes environmental protection as an essential aspect of national interest and human survival. 8. Integration of Science and Law in Decision-Making Unlike traditional courts, the NGT gives substantial weight to scientific evidence and expert testimony. Its orders often rely on environmental impact assessments, satellite imagery, pollution data, and biodiversity reports. This scientific rigor enhances the quality of adjudication, enabling decisions that are not only legally sound but also ecologically rational. The Tribunal’s insistence on evidence-based reasoning is particularly valuable in climate-related disputes, where data interpretation is crucial for establishing causation and liability. 9. Contribution to Sustainable Development and Green Economy Goals The NGT’s functioning aligns closely with India’s commitment to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly Goals 13 (Climate Action), 14 (Life Below Water), and 15 (Life on Land). By emphasizing sustainable development in its rulings, the Tribunal has promoted environmentally responsible industrialization, renewable energy adoption, and ecological restoration. Its orders have led to the suspension of projects that violate environmental norms, ensuring that economic growth does not come at the cost of ecological collapse. 10. Influence Beyond the Judiciary: Shaping Public Policy and Administration The Tribunal’s orders often direct government bodies such as the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC), Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), and State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) to implement specific measures for pollution control and environmental management. This creates a ripple effect where judicial pronouncements inform administrative reforms, ensuring policy coherence and inter-departmental accountability. The NGT has thus become an indirect policy influencer, shaping India’s climate response and sustainable development agenda. 11. Development of Comprehensive Environmental Jurisprudence The NGT has produced an extensive corpus of case law that collectively constitutes India’s modern environmental jurisprudence. Its rulings have clarified ambiguities in environmental law, defined new categories of environmental damage, and established precedents for compensation and rehabilitation. This evolving body of jurisprudence serves as a reference point for future litigation, academic research, and policymaking—especially in the emerging domain of climate change law. 12. International Recognition and Comparative Influence Globally, the NGT has been recognized as a model institution for specialized environmental adjudication. International organizations such as the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) have lauded India’s approach for integrating environmental justice within its legal framework. The NGT’s decisions have been cited in foreign jurisdictions, demonstrating its growing influence on global climate and environmental jurisprudence. 13. Ensuring Accountability of Polluters and Industries The Tribunal has consistently enforced the “polluter pays” principle, ensuring that those responsible for environmental damage bear the cost of restoration. This has led to the creation of environmental compensation funds, strengthening deterrence against industrial negligence. In several cases, such as those involving illegal sand mining and river pollution, the NGT has imposed substantial penalties and mandated restoration measures—reinforcing the idea that environmental degradation carries tangible financial and moral consequences. 14. Emphasis on Preventive and Precautionary Action The NGT has expanded the focus of environmental law from post-damage remediation to preventive governance. By invoking the precautionary principle, the Tribunal encourages authorities to act even in the absence of complete scientific certainty if there is potential for serious or irreversible harm. This forward-looking approach is crucial in addressing climate-related uncertainties, where inaction could lead to catastrophic outcomes. Journal of Research and Development Peer Reviewed International, Open Access Journal. ISSN : 2230-9578 | Website: https://jrdrvb.org Volume-17, Issue-9(III) | Sept. - 2025 254 15. Transparent, Accessible, and Digitized Proceedings In recent years, the NGT has embraced technological modernization through digital filing, virtual hearings, and open access to judgments. This digital transition enhances transparency, reduces delays, and widens participation— particularly during climate emergencies or pandemics when physical hearings are restricted. The Tribunal’s online presence enables researchers, activists, and policymakers to track cases, monitor compliance, and analyze environmental trends. 16. Effective Deterrent Against Administrative Inertia and Non-Compliance The NGT’s proactive monitoring and stringent deadlines have created a deterrent effect against governmental apathy and bureaucratic inaction. Its ability to summon senior officials, impose fines, and issue contempt notices ensures a higher level of compliance among administrative agencies. By holding both public and private entities accountable, the NGT reinforces institutional responsibility in environmental governance. 17. Bridging the Gap Between Global Climate Commitments and Local Implementation India’s international climate obligations—under the Paris Agreement and UNFCCC—require domestic enforcement mechanisms. The NGT functions as this bridge, translating global environmental norms into actionable domestic standards. Its orders often reference international conventions, ensuring that India’s national environmental policies remain aligned with global sustainability goals. 18. Catalyst for Environmental Awareness and Climate Education Beyond legal adjudication, the NGT plays a crucial role in spreading environmental awareness. Its landmark orders often attract widespread media attention, stimulating public discourse on issues like air quality, plastic pollution, river rejuvenation, and deforestation. This educational role indirectly contributes to a more environmentally conscious citizenry, vital for long-term climate resilience. 19. Protection of Ecologically Sensitive Zones The Tribunal has taken an active stance in protecting ecologically fragile regions, including forest areas, wetlands, and coastal ecosystems. Through its interventions, several illegal mining operations, unsustainable tourism projects, and deforestation activities have been halted. This ecological vigilance contributes directly to climate mitigation by conserving carbon sinks and biodiversity hotspots. 20. Contribution to Environmental Democracy and Good Governance Finally, the NGT embodies the spirit of environmental democracy, where citizens, scientists, administrators, and legal professionals collaborate to uphold the principles of sustainability and justice. By fostering participatory governance, enforcing accountability, and promoting transparency, the Tribunal strengthens the foundations of democratic environmental stewardship—an essential pillar for addressing the global climate crisis. Weak Points of Present Research Study While the National Green Tribunal (NGT) has undeniably revolutionized India’s environmental governance by establishing a specialized legal platform for environmental adjudication, its journey has been marred by significant structural, procedural, and functional challenges. Despite its noble mandate and proactive jurisprudence, the Tribunal’s effectiveness in handling climate-related environmental disputes remains constrained by a combination of institutional, legal, administrative, and practical weaknesses. These limitations collectively undermine its potential as a robust mechanism for environmental and climate justice. 1. Lack of Explicit Climate Change Jurisdiction The NGT was established under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, which primarily empowers it to address issues related to specific environmental legislations such as the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, and Water and Air Pollution Acts. However, climate change is not explicitly included within its statutory jurisdiction. As a result, many climate-related cases—such as those concerning carbon emissions, greenhouse gas regulation, or climate adaptation— fall into a legal grey area. The Tribunal often relies on broad interpretations of “environmental harm” to hear such matters, which leads to inconsistency and limited legal clarity. The absence of a dedicated legislative framework for climate change litigation significantly curtails the Tribunal’s proactive role in India’s climate governance architecture. 2. Limited Enforcement Mechanism Although the NGT possesses judicial authority to issue binding orders, it lacks direct enforcement powers. Its orders often depend on administrative and executive agencies like the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC), Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), and State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) for implementation. This dependency creates bureaucratic delays, partial compliance, or, at times, complete noncompliance. Several NGT judgments—especially those involving powerful industrial lobbies or politically sensitive development projects—have remained unenforced due to executive inertia and lack of accountability mechanisms. This disconnect between judicial direction and administrative execution weakens the credibility of the Tribunal’s verdicts. 3. Insufficient Technical and Scientific Capacity Environmental and climate disputes often involve highly complex scientific data related to atmospheric chemistry, hydrology, energy systems, carbon emissions, and biodiversity indicators. The NGT, though designed as a Journal of Research and Development Peer Reviewed International, Open Access Journal. ISSN : 2230-9578 | Website: https://jrdrvb.org Volume-17, Issue-9(III) | Sept. - 2025 255 multidisciplinary body, faces a shortage of expert members from relevant scientific and technical fields. Many vacancies remain unfilled for long periods, and the available experts are often overburdened. This limits the Tribunal’s ability to conduct independent scientific assessments or interpret advanced climate models. As a result, decisions may rely heavily on secondary reports or government data, which may be biased or incomplete. 4. Inadequate Regional Accessibility and Representation The NGT has only five regional benches (Delhi, Bhopal, Pune, Kolkata, and Chennai), which are expected to cover the entire country. This limited geographical distribution results in restricted access to justice for rural and marginalized communities—especially those in environmentally vulnerable regions such as the North-East, the Himalayas, or coastal areas. Many affected populations, including tribal groups and low-income farmers, lack the financial or logistical means to approach distant NGT benches. This centralization undermines the principle of environmental democracy and disproportionately excludes those most affected by environmental and climate degradation. 5. Procedural Complexity and Legal Technicalities Although the NGT was envisioned as a speedy and citizen-friendly forum, in practice, the Tribunal has adopted procedures that are often legally complex and resource-intensive. The requirement of submitting technical affidavits, scientific evidence, and environmental impact assessments (EIAs) places an undue burden on common citizens and grassroots organizations. Furthermore, the NGT’s adherence to quasi-judicial procedures, though necessary for fairness, sometimes mirrors the bureaucratic rigidity of regular courts, causing delays and discouraging public participation. 6. Lack of Consistency in Judgments and Jurisprudence While the NGT has delivered several landmark verdicts, critics note inconsistency in its legal reasoning and orders. Different benches have sometimes issued contradictory interpretations of key environmental principles such as polluter pays and sustainable development. This inconsistency stems from the absence of a centralized appellate mechanism (except appeal to the Supreme Court) and from varying levels of expertise among the members. The lack of a uniform judicial philosophy weakens predictability, which is essential for effective environmental governance and policy formulation. 7. Weak Institutional Coordination Effective environmental governance requires collaboration among multiple institutions—legislative, executive, and judicial. However, the NGT often operates in isolation from ministries, regulatory boards, and local governance bodies. Coordination gaps between the NGT, MoEFCC, CPCB, and SPCBs lead to overlapping responsibilities, duplication of work, and conflicting directives. This lack of institutional synergy reduces the overall efficiency of environmental and climate governance systems. 8. Limited Role in Policy Formation and Climate Adaptation Strategies Unlike environmental tribunals in some other countries (e.g., the Environment Court of New Zealand or Australia’s Land and Environment Court), the NGT has no formal mandate to participate in policy formulation or legislative review. Consequently, its role remains reactive rather than proactive, confined to dispute resolution rather than shaping preventive climate policies. Given the accelerating pace of global warming, India’s environmental governance system requires proactive engagement with climate adaptation, resilience planning, and carbon neutrality strategies— areas where the NGT currently plays a minimal role. 9. Overlapping Jurisdictions and Institutional Conflicts The NGT’s jurisdiction sometimes overlaps with that of other judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, such as the High Courts, Supreme Court, and specialized tribunals like the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) or National Biodiversity Authority. This overlap often leads to jurisdictional conflicts and duplication of efforts, resulting in delays, forum shopping, and administrative inefficiency. Furthermore, the Supreme Court’s occasional intervention in NGT matters has blurred institutional boundaries, creating uncertainty about the Tribunal’s autonomy. 10. Financial and Administrative Constraints The NGT faces chronic budgetary and staffing limitations. Many of its regional benches operate with skeletal staff and limited technological infrastructure, impeding its ability to conduct field inspections, maintain digital case records, or monitor post-judgment compliance. Without sufficient funding for environmental research, data collection, or digital monitoring systems, the Tribunal’s long-term sustainability remains uncertain. 11. Political and Corporate Resistance In many instances, NGT orders—particularly those restricting mining, infrastructure development, or industrial operations—have faced political backlash and corporate resistance. Environmental protection is often perceived as an obstacle to economic growth, leading to attempts to dilute the Tribunal’s powers. Several legislative and administrative efforts have been made to limit its jurisdiction, reduce the number of expert members, or subject its decisions to greater executive control. Such pressures threaten the Tribunal’s independence and undermine its role as an impartial guardian of environmental justice. Journal of Research and Development Peer Reviewed International, Open Access Journal. ISSN : 2230-9578 | Website: https://jrdrvb.org Volume-17, Issue-9(III) | Sept. - 2025 256 12. Poor Public Awareness and Participation Despite its decade-long existence, the NGT remains relatively unknown to the general public, especially in rural and semi-urban areas. Lack of environmental literacy and legal awareness prevents citizens from utilizing the Tribunal as a platform for justice. Moreover, language barriers, high litigation costs, and procedural formalities restrict access to grassroots communities, NGOs, and local activists who could otherwise contribute valuable data and testimonies. 13. Absence of Monitoring and Evaluation Mechanisms The NGT’s judgments often lack systematic follow-up mechanisms to assess whether its directives have produced tangible environmental improvements. Once a case is disposed of, the responsibility for monitoring compliance typically falls on state agencies, which may not provide transparent updates. This absence of feedback loops and impact evaluation diminishes the Tribunal’s ability to measure its success or learn from its shortcomings. 14. Inadequate Integration with International Climate Frameworks Although India is a signatory to global agreements such as the Paris Agreement and UNFCCC, the NGT’s operations are largely disconnected from international environmental law frameworks. There is minimal alignment between NGT orders and India’s Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement. Strengthening this linkage could help India meet its international commitments while reinforcing domestic climate governance. Current Trends of Present Research Study 1. Suo Motu Cognizance of Climate-Emergent Issues The NGT is increasingly initiating suo motu actions in response to reports/news about climate-related environmental hazards. For example: o Rapid expansion of Himalayan glacial lakes due to glacier melt, triggering risks of glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs). The NGT has taken notice and asked the Centre and concerned agencies to respond. o Emissions of high-level methane from landfill sites (Ahmedabad, Surat) based on ISRO / news reports, being taken up suo motu by the NGT. This trend indicates a shift from reactive litigation (petitions filed by individuals/NGOs) to pro-active judicial oversight. 2. Broader Integration of Climate Science and Data To adjudicate climate-linked disputes, the NGT is relying more on scientific data, satellite reports, GIS imagery, risk assessments, ecological studies etc. The glacial lake expansion case involves data about changes in lake surface area over years. Also, reports of tree species’ physiological stress or climate+harvest impacts (e.g. on ancient Parijat trees) are being used to show climate change consequences. 3. Increasing Focus on Natural Disasters, Flood Plains, and Climate Risk Mitigation The NGT is showing growing concern for risk mitigation in climate hotspots: flood plains, landslide-prone areas, river basin management. For example: mapping flood plains (Satluj in Punjab) is being ordered or enforced following NGT direction. Also, decisions/inquiries into afforestation and compensatory afforestation for infrastructure projects (e.g., expressways) show growing concern for biodiversity loss, ecosystem protection. 4. Environmental Justice and Inclusion of Local/Community Concerns The NGT is hearing more cases where local or grassroots/environmental community voices are central: e.g. cases about wetlands (wetland encroachments, delayed notification of wetlands), lagoon pollution (Brari Nambal Lagoon) where local ecology and community impact is a factor. Also, protection of wildlife sanctuaries from noise pollution (e.g. Nawabganj Bird Sanctuary) demonstrates sensitivity to environmental rights at local levels. 5. Stricter Implementation and Monitoring of NGT Orders Recent NGT orders do more than issue directions: they demand reports, timelines, documentation, monitoring by agencies. For example: monitoring of afforestation along expressways, requiring documentation and proof. Also, for wetlands, monitoring of mapping, ground-truthing etc. tells that the Tribunal is paying attention to compliance and follow-through. 6. Use of Technology: GIS, Remote Sensing, Satellite Imagery, Digital Tools To detect environmental harm and show evidence, there's greater reliance on satellite imagery, mapping, GIS, digital elevation models (DEMs) etc. Such tools are used in flood plain mapping (Satluj mapping) and in assessing expansion of glacial lakes. Also, in monitoring land use change, encroachments etc. This helps the NGT and associated institutions bypass delays in ground-visits or local reporting. 7. Expanding Scope of Environmental Issues Tackled Initially, most NGT cases were about air pollution, water pollution, forests, mining etc. Now, issues like methane emissions (GHGs), noise pollution, climate induced risk to biodiversity, species extinction risk, glacial lake expansion are being taken up. Journal of Research and Development Peer Reviewed International, Open Access Journal. ISSN : 2230-9578 | Website: https://jrdrvb.org Volume-17, Issue-9(III) | Sept. - 2025 257 8. Emphasis on Biodiversity and Ecological Integrity Alongside Climate Impacts The links between biodiversity loss/ecological degradation and climate change are more frequently being recognized. E.g. threats to ancient trees (Parijat), wetland degradation, habitat loss for migratory birds etc. 9. Greater Legal Scrutiny of Infrastructure Projects & Developmental Trade-Offs The NGT is increasingly scrutinizing the environmental cost of large infrastructure projects (roads, flyovers, highways, expressways) for their impacts on forests, wetlands, wildlife corridors, trees etc. The compensatory afforestation delays for the Delhi-Dehradun expressway is a case in point. 10. Policy & Regulatory Nudges Directed by NGT Orders NGT orders are pushing government/regulatory bodies to update or adhere to environmental rules: e.g., notification of wetlands under relevant rules; ensuring vapour recovery systems at fuel stations (mandated earlier by NGT) are maintained; ensuring action on illegal mining and plastic pollution etc. 11. Climate Litigation as Human Rights Litigation More cases are framing climate/environmental harms as violations of fundamental rights (e.g. right to life, health, clean environment). There is an increasing connection in judgments/petitions between constitutional rights and environmental/climate justice. 12. Greater Public & Media Pressure Prompting Judicial Action Media reports or scientific articles are increasingly triggering NGT action (via suo motu or public petitions). For instance, newspaper reports about methane emissions from landfills led to NGT orders. Similarly, news about glacial lakes expansion triggered NGT notices. 13. Increased Emphasis on Early Warning Systems, Risk Assessment, Disaster Preparedness Because climate change increases disaster risk (floods, GLOFs, landslides), NGT is pushing for monitoring systems, risk maps, flood plain demarcation etc. These are becoming components of environmental adjudication. 14. Growing Emphasis on Cross-Sectoral & Inter-Agency Collaboration Cases show involvement of multiple agencies – CPCB, state pollution control boards, forest departments, botanical survey bodies, etc. Also coordination with scientific research institutions for ecological data (e.g., botanical institutes in the Parijat tree case). 15. Legal Recognition of Emerging Pollutants / Non-Traditional Environmental Hazards Beyond chemical pollution or industrial waste, issues like noise pollution (near bird sanctuaries), methane emissions from landfills, loss of ecosystem services etc. are being recognized. These broaden the concept of “environmental harm” before the NGT. 16. Pressures of Climate Policy & International Commitments Feeding into Domestic Expectations India’s commitments under international climate treaties (Paris Agreement etc.) are pushing for stronger domestic enforcement. Civil society and litigants are increasingly referencing climate policy goals, NDCs etc. Though direct citation of treaties in NGT judgments is variable, the policy environment is influencing case framing and expectations. History of Present Research Study The demand for specialized environmental courts in India began in the 1980s with the rise of public interest litigation. The Law Commission of India (186th Report, 2003) proposed a dedicated environmental court system. Following international models like Australia’s Land and Environment Court, India enacted the National Green Tribunal Act in 2010. Since its inception in 2010, the NGT has handled over 30,000 cases, significantly influencing environmental jurisprudence. Over time, it has evolved from addressing pollution and forest clearance cases to handling complex climate-related issues, symbolizing a paradigm shift in environmental justice delivery in India. History 1. Pre-Independence and Early Environmental Awareness Before India’s independence in 1947, environmental protection was not a distinct legal or policy concern. The British colonial administration primarily focused on resource extraction and economic exploitation. Early legislation such as the Indian Forest Act of 1927, Shore Nuisance (Bombay and Kolaba) Act of 1853, and the Indian Penal Code (Section 268 on Public Nuisance) had only indirect environmental implications. These laws reflected a utilitarian rather than conservationist approach, emphasizing the economic value of forests and natural resources rather than ecosystem preservation. 2. Post-Independence: Constitutional and Legal Evolution After independence, India began recognizing the need to balance development with environmental protection. The Constitution of India (1950) initially did not explicitly mention environmental protection. However, through the 42nd Constitutional Amendment (1976), environmental protection became a fundamental duty (Article 51A[g]) and was embedded in the Directive Principles of State Policy (Article 48A), directing the state to protect and improve the environment and safeguard forests and wildlife. This constitutional recognition laid the groundwork for future legal and institutional developments in environmental governance.