M/S TRIVENI ENGINEERING AND INDUSTRIES LTD. versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

Citation: [2025] 9 S.C.R. 300 · Decided: 01-09-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MANOJ MISRA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 6 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 9 S.C.R. 300 : 2025 INSC 1060
M/s Triveni Engineering and Industries Ltd. 
v. 
State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
(Civil Appeal No(s). 8119-8120 of 2022)
01 September 2025
[Manoj Misra and Ujjal Bhuyan,* JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Issue arose as regards the order passed by the National Green 
Tribunal imposing a compensation of ₹18 crores on the appellant for 
alleged environmental violations; and whether the tribunal adhered 
to fair procedure while conducting its proceedings.
Headnotes†
National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 – s.19 – Water (Prevention 
and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 – ss.21, 22 – Environment 
(Protection) Act, 1986 – Environmental degradation – 
Environmental compensation – Power of the Control 
Board to take samples of effluents and procedure to be 
followed – Opportunity of hearing – Complaint against the  
appellant-engaged in sugar manufacturing alleging that the 
sugar mill of the appellant was discharging untreated waste 
in a particular drain resulting in contamination of ground 
water in an area of about one and a half kilometer around the 
sugar mill having depth upto 50 metres – NGT constituted a 
Joint Committee of Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), 
Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board (UPPCB) and District 
Magistrate (DM) to conduct inspection – On basis thereof, 
NGT held that there was illegal disposal of untreated effluents, 
dilution at the outlet to conceal the real status, absence of 
monitoring, absence of record of oil and grease stored and 
ETP logbook, compensation of Rs.18 crores at the rate of 2 
percent of annual turnover would be justified and that the 
compensation recovered may be utilized for restoration of 
the environment – Legality:
Held: Impugned orders are in complete violation of the procedures 
laid down in the ss.21 and 22 of the 1974 Act, 1986 Act, and the 
2010 Act, including s.19 thereof – Impugned decisions which entail 
adverse civil consequences upon the appellant were passed without 
* Author
[2025] 9 S.C.R. 
301
M/s Triveni Engineering and Industries Ltd. v. 
State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
following the due procedure laid down under the statute as well 
as the elementary principles of natural justice – Thus, such orders 
are illegal and null and void – NGT exercises judicial functions – 
Thus, it is all the more necessary for the NGT to adhere to a 
fair procedure which is statutorily laid down of which principles 
of natural justice are an inalienable part – Rigor of s.19(1) of 
the 2010 Act is qua the procedure to be adopted by the NGT in 
conducting its proceedings – It cannot be stretched to abandon 
the statutory procedure laid down u/s.21 and 22 of the Water Act 
and by outsourcing investigation to administrative committees by 
overlooking the statutory provisions and basing its decisions on 
the recommendation of such administrative committee – This is not 
within the remit of NGT – In the quest for doing justice, NGT has 
ended up doing just the reverse – Ordinarily, in a case where there 
is violation of the principles of natural justice, parties are relegated to 
the adjudicatory forum to re-do the exercise after following the due 
process – However, the entire exercise has been vitiated because 
of non-conforming to the laid down procedure contemplated u/
ss.21 and 22 of the 1974 Act – Relegating the parties back to the 
NGT would serve no useful purpose – However, UPPCB free to 
carry out inspection and take remedial measures qua the sugar 
mill of the appellant by following the statutory procedure, including 
adherence to the principles of natural justice – Impugned orders 
passed by the NGT set aside. [Paras 30-34]
Case Law Cited
A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India [1970] 1 SCR 457 : (1969) 2 SCC 
262; S.N. Mukherjee v. Union of India [1990] Supp. 1 SCR 44 : 
(1990) 4 SCC 594 – followed.
Grasim Industries Limited v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2024 SCC 
Online SC 3585 – relied on.
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Ankita Sinha [2021] 10 
SCR 1 : 2021 SCC Online SC 1298; T. Takano v. Securities and 
Exchange Board of India [2022] 16 SCR 212 : (2022) 8 SCC 162; 
State Bank of India v. Rajesh Agarwal [2023] 7 SCR 476 : (2023) 
6 SCC 1; Kantha Vibhag Yuva Koli Samaj Parivartan Trust v. State 
of Gujarat [2022] 1 SCR 1006 : (2023) 13 SCC 525; Sanghar 
Zuber Ismail v. Union of India [2021] 8 SCR 525 : (2021) 17 SCC 
827; Delhi Pollution Control Committee v. Lodhi Property Company 
Limited, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1601 – referred to.
302
[

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.