The Court today agreed that the NGT had relied too heavily on an expert committee’s report about preparatory work at the site without considering evidence of its pre-existing damaged condition.
“We are afraid, the Tribunal got swayed by the expert committee’s report that massive preparatory work is going on at the site and went on to conclude that by undertaking such work, the appellant has severely damaged the floodplain. This conclusion was reached by the Tribunal without examining the contemporaneous evidence regarding pre-existing damaged condition of the floodplain and conspicuous failure of the authorities to implement its earlier judgment in the Yamuna matter,” observed the Court.
The Court also held that the polluter pays principle could not be applied without establishing a causal link between the alleged polluter’s activities and the environmental degradation.
It further criticised the NGT for effectively turning the proceedings into an exercise for rehabilitation and development of the floodplain, rather than determining the damage attributable to VVKI.
“The Tribunal completely altered the character of the dispute before itself and converted it into a proceeding for fresh development of the Yamuna floodplain, and in doing so, it burdened the appellant to bear the expenses of such development activity. Effectively, the Tribunal burdened the appellant with the task of developing something that it never destroyed,” said the Court.
Additionally, the Court also criticised the DDA for permitting the event on an active floodplain.
“We feel that the DDA was bound to act in a manner that the trust reposed in it, as the agency responsible for the rehabilitation and ecological maintenance of the Yamuna floodplain, is not shaken in any manner. Further, DDA was bound to take all preventive steps and precautions to avoid any further deterioration of the active floodplain. Evidently, the authority failed to act in accordance with its duties towards the public at large,” said the Court.