Team Herald
MARGAO: The recent order passed by the High Court of Bombay at Goa stating that no provision has been pointed out to them in terms of which the court is required to grant or refuse leave to prosecute the proceedings before the National Green Tribunal has left the petitioner Royla Fernandes in a confused state pertaining to the issue of western bypass project, demanding the bypass on stilts.
As informed by petitioner, the High Court has passed this recent order on March 16, and hence she is getting mixed reactions from the legal fraternity in order to challenge the order before the Supreme Court.
“No provision has been pointed out to us in terms of which we are required to grant or refuse leave to prosecute the proceedings before the National Green Tribunal (NGT). The NGT’s order dated 10.11.2021 was made upon hearing the learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned Advocate General for the State of Goa. The effect of such an order cannot be sought to be diluted by taking out such a Misc. Civil Application before us”, stated the order.
It is pertinent to note that Royla Fernandes had filed a petition before the NGT demanding to build the stretch of western bypass from Seraulim to Varca on stilts. Petitioner had pointed out destruction of environment and ecology if not built on stilts. Upon which NGT had directed to form a 10-member committee to study and come out with the solution in this regard.
However, in later stages NGT has deferred the hearing in the said petition based on the pendency of public interest litigation and insisted the petitioner to approach the HC for permission. Upon which Royla had filed an application, and submitted that leave should be granted by the HC to prosecute the original application before the NGT.
Speaking to Herald Royla said that the recent order passed by the HC stating that no provision has been pointed out to them in terms of which the courts are required to grant or refuse leave to prosecute the proceedings before the National Green Tribunal has created confusions.
“It is understood that the NGT is asking to take the permission from the HC and the HC has dismissed the application by stating no provisions. It is like a game of cat and mouse. Now, I will be challenging both orders before the Supreme Court,” she stated.
Royla further said that she will be taking into consideration the views from the legal experts in this regard before approaching the SC.
“At the first time the NGT directed to form the committee in order to study the matter. However, the Advocate General told the NGT that the matter in this regard is pending before the HC, and hence I was asked to take permission from the HC to proceed the matter in NGT”, she said.
