AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This Application seeks review of order dated 06.05.2022 in Original Application No. 29/2021, Col. Sunil Kumar (Retd.) & Anr v. Union of India & Ors. The said order dealt with the grievance against non-compliance of environmental norms in the construction of building project by Respondent No. 8, Ireo Hospitality Company, Private Limited at Sector 58, Gurgaon.
The Tribunal sought a report about factual status from a joint Committee of MoEF&CC, CPCB, State PCB and SEIAA, Haryana. In the light of the report of the Committee dated 26.06.2021, further report was sought about validity of EC. In response thereto, the stand of the State PCB was that the EC was valid and operational. Requisite clearances had been taken. Vide order dated 06.05.2022, after hearing counsel for the parties, the application was disposed of. It was noted that there was no objection to the report to the effect that the EC was valid and operative.
In the Review Application, contention raised is that the status report filed before the Tribunal is misleading as building plans had been cancelled and thereafter construction was not permissible. Licenses were rescheduled which implied that earlier permissions did not survive.
On 22.07.2022, it was directed that the Review Application be listed in Court even though under the Rules, it was to be listed by circulation.
When we took up the matter for consideration today, preliminary objection has been raised on behalf of the project proponent (PP) that the Review Application is barred by limitation. It is pointed out that period of limitation under Rule 22 of the NGT (Practice and Procedure) Rules, 2011 is 30 days from the receipt of the order. The order being 06.05.2022, the limitation expired on 06.06.2022, which is so stated even by the review applicant. The Review Application has been filed on 02.07.2022. Even if the benefit of NGT vacation is granted, the last date for limitation was up to 01.07.2022. No application for condonation was initially filed and in application subsequently filed on 16.07.2022, there is no explanation for the delay. Relevant para in the Review Application is reproduced below:-
“3. It is submitted that the Impugned Order was passed on 06.05.2022. Rule 22 of the NGT Rules provides that a review application shall be filed within 30 days of passing of the impugned order. Accordingly, Applicant had time until 06.06.2022 to file the present Review Application against Impugned Order. Since it was court vacations from 01.06.2022 to 30.06.2022 and lawyers offices were also closed, the present Review Application was filed on 02.07.2022 i.e. immediately upon reopening of counsel's office. Thus, delay if any, in filing the Review Application may kindly be condoned.”
From the above it is seen that the Review Applicant has acknowledged that time to file review was till 06.06.2022 and beyond saying that there was vacation up to 30.06.2022, no explanation has been furnished why review application was not filed on 01.07.2022. He has also not given any reason why application for condonation of delay was not filed along with the application.
Though learned counsel for the PP and the State submitted that even on merits, there is no case for review, we have not gone into this question in view of the fact that the application for review is barred by limitation and no case has been made up for condonation of delay.
The Review Application is accordingly dismissed as barred by limitation.