Allowed

Rajesh Sharma v. Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

NGT1 Dec 2025IA No. 474/2025 in Appeal No. 48/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The National Green Tribunal allowed an application for condonation of delay in filing an appeal regarding an Environmental Clearance. The court accepted the appellant’s explanation of illness and treatment as sufficient to justify the 54-day delay, granting four weeks for respondent replies and listing the matter for future hearing.

What did the court decide?

Allow IA No. 474/2025 to condone delay of 54 days in filing the appeal.

Rajesh Sharma vs Ministry of Environment Forest and… — Writ and Judicial Review | NGT (2025)

¶1

Item No. 13

¶2

Court No. 1

¶3

BEFORE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

Appeal No. 48/2025 (IA No 474/2025, IA No 475/2025)

Rajesh Sharma

Appellant

Versus

Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change & Ors.

¶9

Respondent(s)

¶10

Date of hearing: 01.12.2025

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA, CHAIRPERSON HON’BLE DR. A. SENTHIL VEL, EXPERT MEMBER

¶12

Appellant: Mr. Ravi Agarwal, Advocate for Appellant (Through VC)

¶13

Respondents: Ms. Suhasini Sen & Ms. Supraja V., Advs. for R - 1

¶14

Mr. Rahul Khurana, Adv. for R - 2 to 5

¶15

Mr. Pallav Mongia & Ms. Kashish Lalwani, Advs. for R - 6 & 7

¶16

ORDER

¶17

By this Appeal filed under Section 16(h) and 18 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, Appellant has challenged the Environmental Clearance dated 19.02.2025 issued in favour of the Respondents No. 6 and 7. There is a delay of 54 days in filing the Appeal. Hence, IA No. 474/2025 has been filed by the Appellant. The Appellant has disclosed the reason for the delay in the application by stating that the Appellant was unwell and under treatment from 27.02.2025, hence, after recovery he could file the present appeal. The medical documents in support of such a plea have been placed on record.

¶18

Opposing the prayer, learned Counsel for Respondents No. 6 and 7 has submitted that in Civil Suit No. 380/2025, the Appellant was appearing all through, therefore, he could have filed this appeal also within time.

¶19

¶20

The proceedings of civil suit have been placed on record which indicate that in those proceedings the Appellant was appearing through the Counsel. Ultimately, the civil suit has been withdrawn by the order dated 22.09.2025. Hence, the prosecution of the civil proceedings through the advocate does not establish that the stand of illness taken by the Appellant is incorrect or false.

¶21

Since sufficient explanation has been furnished by the Appellant preventing him from filing the appeal within time and the delay is of 54 days which is within the condonable period of 60 days in terms of the proviso to section 16 of the NGT Act, therefore, we are of the view that a case is made out for allowing the prayer made in IA No. 474/2025. Even otherwise the law is well settled that a liberal approach is required to be adopted while considering the application for condonation of delay.

¶22

Hence, in these circumstances, IA No. 474/2025 is allowed and delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

¶23

Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents No. 6 and 7 seeks four weeks’ time to file reply in the appeal.

¶24

It will be open to all other respondents to file their reply in the appeal within the same period.

¶25

List on 26.02.2026.

¶26

Prakash Shrivastava, CP

¶27

Dr. A. Senthil Vel, EM

¶28

December 01, 2025 Appeal No. 48/2025 (IA No 474/2025, IA No 475/2025) dv

¶29

Rajesh Sharma v. Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Sharma v. Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bittu vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Arvind Singh vs Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

Arvind Singh vs Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

Chetan Kumar Navintray Vyas vs Union of India

M/S Rama Natural Foods Pvt. Ltd. vs Commission for Air Quality Management in National Capital Region and Adjoining Areas

M/S. Mabel Hayes Inc. vs Delhi Pollution Control Committee

Thota Ganga Raju vs 1.THE Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by Its Principal Secretary Water Resources (Irrigation) Department

Mr. Shashikant Vitthal Kamble vs Ministry of Environment and Forest and Climate Change (Moef & Cc) New Delhi.

News Item Titled "Illegal Dumping Site, Emerges Near Sultanpur National Park in Gurugram" Appearing in the Hindustan Times Dated 14.08.2025. vs

Arvind Singh vs Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

Arvind Singh vs Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

Debaditya Sinha vs Mirzapur Thermal Energy Up Private Limited

Aajib Ali vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Aajib Ali vs State of Uttar Pradesh