Dismissed

Mr Vijay Kumar vs

NGT17 Nov 2025IA No. 724/2025 in Original Application No. 262/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for waiver of costs imposed on the Deputy Conservator of Forest for delayed filing of response was dismissed. The court held that the new incumbent had sufficient time to file the response and no valid ground for waiver was made out.

What did the court decide?

Application for waiver of costs is dismissed; deposit of costs ordered to be made within one month.

Mr Vijay Kumar vs — Writ and Judicial Review | NGT (2025)

¶1

Item No.04

¶2

Court No. 2

¶3

BEFORE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL

¶4

PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶5

Original Application No. 262/2025 ( I.A No. 724/2025 )

Vijay Kumar

Applicant

Versus

Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors. Respondents

¶10

Date of hearing: 17.11.2025

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER

¶12

A pplicant: Applicant in person.

¶13

Respondents: Ms. Jyoti Mendiratta, Standing Counsel, Advocate for respondents no. 1 to 5. Mr. Kush Sharma, Advocate for respondent no. 6 (through VC).

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Report dated 27.10.2025 has been filed by respondent no. 4- DCF, North, GNCTD.

¶16

Vide order dated 29.08.2025 costs of Rs. 10,000/- was imposed on respondent no. 4 for not filing of his response as directed vide order dated 30.05.2025.

¶17

I.A. No. 724/2025 has been filed by respondent no. 4- DCF, North, GNCTD for waiver of costs.

¶18

Respondent no. 4 has sought waiver of costs on the grounds that the present incumbent took charge on 04.07.2025 and expedited the hearing in the matter on 13.08.2025, 20.08.2025, 02.09.2025 and 24.09.2025. Findings on behalf of respondent no. 4 were recorded in the report of the Joint Committee. The delay in filing the reply on behalf of Deputy

¶19

¶20

Conservator of Forest (North forest Division), Government of NCT of Delhi is neither deliberate nor intentional.

¶21

Respondent no. 4 was impleaded by this Tribunal vide order dated 30.05.2025 and was directed to file his response within two months. No response was filed till 29.08.2025 on which date the costs were imposed. The present incumbent had joined on 04.09.2025 and had sufficient time to file his response. No plausible explanation has been given for not filing of the response within two months and even till 29.08.2025. No valid and sufficient ground for waiver of costs is made out. Accordingly, I.A. No.

¶22

724/2025 is dismissed .

¶23

Costs be deposited within one month with NGT Bar Association, Principal Bench, New Delhi as directed by order dated 29.08.2025.

¶24

Arguments heard.

¶25

Judgement/order is reserved.

¶26

Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM

¶27

Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM

¶28

November 17th, 2025 Original Application No. 262/2025 ( I.A No. 724/2025 ) AB

¶29

Mr Vijay Kumar vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Vijay Kumar vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Francisco Fernandes vs Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority

Francisco Fernandes vs Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority

Francisco Fernandes vs Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority

Ms Reactive Polymers Ltd. vs the Appellate Authority

Mrs Augusta Dsouza vs Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority

Samir Bapodra (Partner of Tapi Stone Quarry) vs State Environment Impact Assessment Authority Gujarat

Samir Bapodra (Partner of Tapi Stone Quarry) vs State Environment Impact Assessment Authority Gujarat

Urbashi Jena D/O Haramohan Bala Aged About 55 Years vs 1. State of Odisha Represented by Chief Secretary Government of Odisha

Dr Jeet Singh Yadav vs

Jitendra Nishad vs

Jitendra Nishad vs

Shaikh Khurshidabibi Mohammed Aasif vs

Mohan Singh Bagdri vs

Neeraj Chaudhary vs