Dismissed

News Item Titled "Endangered Gangetic Dolphins Found in Most Tributaries of Ganges Prompting Urgent Conservation" Appearing in Mongaby- India Dated 20.05.2024 vs

NGT18 Feb 2026IA No. 755/2025 in Original Application No. 727/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal rejected the IA for waiver of costs imposed on Respondent No. 5 for non-appearance, finding no justifiable reason. It directed the absent Respondents No. 7 and No. 9 to appear virtually on the next date.

What did the court decide?

IA No. 755/2025 for waiver of cost rejected. Directed Respondents No. 7 and No. 9 to appear virtually on 29.05.2026.

News Item Titled "Endangered Gangetic Dolphins Found in… — Environment and Pollution | NGT (2026)

¶1

Item No. 06

¶2

Court No. 1

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

Original Application No. 727/2024 (IA No 755/2025)

¶5

News Item Titled "Endangered Gangetic Dolphins Found in Most Tributaries of Ganges Prompting Urgent Conservation" Appearing in Mongaby- India Dated 20.05.2024

¶6

Versus

¶7

Wildlife Institute of India & Ors. Respondent(s)

¶8

Date of hearing: 18.02.2026

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA, CHAIRPERSON HON’BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER

¶10

Respondents: Mr. Gigi. C. George & Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advs. for NMCG & Wildlife Institute of India Mr. Bhanwar Pal Singh Jadon, Mr. Shivansh Sharma, Ms. Anjali Sharma, Mr. Anuj Verma & Ms. Disha Tiwari, Advs. for R - 8 Mr. Saurabh Balwani, Adv. for CPCB Mr. Rishi K. Awasthi, Adv. for R - 4 & 6 (Through VC) Mr. Rajan Shaw, Adv. for R - 5 (Through VC) Mr. Debmalya Ganguli, Adv. for R - 10 (Through VC)

¶11

ORDER

¶12

Learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 8 submits that the reply

¶13

has been filed yesterday evening. Office is directed to examine and place it on record.

¶14

IA No. 755/2025 has been filed by someone without disclosing in the title of the application the purpose for which this application has been filed nor at the end of this application, it is mentioned as to which applicant or respondent in the OA has filed this IA.

¶15

Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No. 5 submits that he has filed this IA on behalf of the Respondent No. 5. The prayer in this IA is for waiver of cost which has been imposed by the order dated 04.09.2025.

¶16

¶17

Having examined the OA and the proceedings, we find that inspite of service of notice, the Respondent No. 5 had not appeared nor had filed the reply. Therefore, the Tribunal by the order dated 01.05.2025 had directed the Respondent No. 5 to remain virtually present on the next date, i.e., on 04.09.2025. On 04.09.2025, again the Respondent No. 5 had neither appeared nor the reply was filed. Therefore, the cost of Rs. 10,000/- was imposed. We find that justifiable reason exists for imposition of cost and no case is made out for waiver of the cost. IA No. 755/2025 is accordingly rejected.

¶18

Inspite of service of notice, the Respondent No. 7 - Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Chief Wildlife Warden, Govt. of Jharkhand and Respondent No. 9 - Principal Chief Conservator of Forests and Chief Wildlife Warden, Govt. of Uttarakhand have neither appeared nor filed the reply. Therefore, the Respondents No. 7 and 9 are directed to appear virtually on the next date of hearing and make their stand clear.

¶19

Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the Respondents No. 7 and 9 for compliance.

¶20

List on 29.05.2026.

¶21

Prakash Shrivastava, CP

¶22

Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM

¶23

February 18, 2026 Original Application No. 727/2024 (IA No 755/2025) dv

¶24

News Item Titled "Endangered Gangetic Dolphins Found in Most Tributaries of Ganges Prompting Urgent Conservation" Appearing in Mongaby- India Dated 20.05.2024 vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

News Item Titled "Endangered Gangetic Dolphins Found in Most Tributaries of Ganges Prompting Urgent Conservation" Appearing in Mongaby- India Dated 20.05.2024 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

Daulat Ram S/O Shri Kuldeep Gena vs State of Rajasthan through District Collector Ajmer

Daulat Ram S/O Shri Kuldeep Gena vs State of Rajasthan through District Collector Ajmer

Reena Varghese vs Kerala State Pollution Control Board

Reena Varghese vs Kerala State Pollution Control Board

S. Sivaiah Naidu vs Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change

Ms Qua Water Technologies Pvt. Ltd. through Authorized Person Mr Umesh Bhokare vs Maharasthra Pollution Control Board

Abhishek Vikas Gondane vs Seiaa

Abhisht Kusum Gupta vs State of Uttarakhand

Hawa Singh Khobra vs State of Haryana

Veena Kumari vs Haryana State Pollution Control Board

Renu Kumar vs Municipal Corporation

Uday Bhan vs State of Uttar Pradesh (through Its Chief Secretary)

Uday Bhan vs State of Uttar Pradesh (through Its Chief Secretary)

Rainbow Environments Pvt. Ltd. vs Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change