Partly allowed

Society Fdevelopment of Human Resource v. State of Haryana

NGT10 Feb 2026IA No. 88/2026 in Original Application No. 95/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application challenging impleadment as appellant instead of intervener and combining hearing of appeal with recall application. Stay of proceedings pending decision on recall, IA allowed, notice issued, listed for April 2026.

What did the court decide?

Stay of proceedings before Appellate Authority subject to deciding recall application first; I.A. No.88/2026 allowed; IA No.87/2026 noticed; proceedings listed on 06.04.2026.

Society Fdevelopment of Human Resource vs State of Haryana — Corruption | NGT (2026)

¶1

Item No. 02

¶2

Court No. 1

¶3

BEFORE THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

¶4

Original Application No. 95/2026 (IA No 87/2026, IA No 88/2026)

¶5

Society for Development of Human Resource

¶6

Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Haryana & Ors.

¶9

Respondent(s)

¶10

Date of hearing: 10.02.2026

¶11

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

¶12

Applicant: Mr. Vivek K. Tankha, Senior Advocate (Through VC) with Mr. Vipul Tiwari, Mr. Inder Dev Singh, Mr. Chaitanya Sharma, Mr. Sujay Chhikara & Ms. Neha Raj Singh, Advs. for Applicant

¶13

ORDER

¶14

By this original application, applicant has challenged the order of the Appellate Authority dated 01.10.2025, whereby, while allowing the applicant’s application for intervention, Appellate Authority has impleaded the applicant as appellant in the appeal. The applicant has also challenged the orders of the Appellate Authority dated 08.01.2026 and 15.01.2026 passed on the applicant’s application for recall of the order dated 01.10.2025, and fixing the appeal and the recall application together for hearing.

¶15

Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant submits that against the closure order, appeal has been preferred by Parvesh Kumar projecting himself to be the president of the unit/society. There is a dispute in this regard, and application for intervention was filed by the applicant in that appeal, questioning the locus of the appellant-Parvesh Kumar and seeking rejection of the appeal. He submits that a serious error has been committed by the Appellate Authority in impleading the present applicant as Co-appellant in the appeal instead of impleading the present applicant

¶16

¶17

as intervener or respondent. He submits that stand of the present applicant in the pending appeal before the Appellate Authority is altogether different from the stand of original appellant- Parvesh Kumar. Hence, two appellants having divergent stands cannot be impleaded in the same capacity. He has further submitted that in such circumstances, an application for recall of the order has been filed before the Appellate Authority but instead of deciding the said application first, Appellate Authority has fixed the appeal for hearing along with the application for recall of the order. He submits that in such circumstances, opportunity to challenge any order passed by the Appellate Authority on his recall application will also be lost.

¶18

Learned Senior Counsel has also pointed out that appellant had filed Civil Writ Petition No.37570/2025 before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, which has been disposed of by observing that issue falls within the specialized domain of environmental and air/water pollution laws and an efficacious alternative statutory remedy is available to the petitioner. He has sought permission to place on record the order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The prayer is allowed.

¶19

Issue notice to the respondents.

¶20

Applicant is directed to serve the respondents and file affidavit of service atleast one week before the next date of hearing.

¶21

I.A. No.88/2026 has been filed by the applicant seeking exemption from filing typed, translated, and legible copies of the certain documents. IA No. 88/2026 is allowed, subject to the condition that applicant will place

¶22

on record all the legible typed copies of the documents on which he wants to rely upon at the time of hearing of the original application.

¶23

¶24

Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has also pressed IA No.87/2026 which is an application for stay.

¶25

Issue notice on IA 87/2026 also.

¶26

Having regard to the circumstances noted above, the proceedings before the Appellate Authority are stayed subject to the condition that if the Appellate Authority chooses to decide the application for recall of the order first and thereafter fix the matter on another date for hearing the appeal then it will be open to the Appellate Authority to proceed with the matter in the meanwhile.

¶27

List on 06.04.2026.

¶28

Prakash Shrivastava, CP

¶29

Dr. A. Senthil Vel, EM

¶30

February 10, 2026 Original Application No. 95/2026 (IA No 87/2026, IA No 88/2026) JG.

¶31

Society Fdevelopment of Human Resource v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Society Fdevelopment of Human Resource v. State of Haryana

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

Arvind Singh vs Union of India

Mahavir Singh vs Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi

Sayyed Mohammed Sabir Usman vs Union of India through Secretary Moef & Cc

1. Jhadeswar Pradhan S/O Rasanand Pradhan Aged About 60YEARS vs 1. State of Odisha Represented by Chief Secretary Government of Odisha

Saheen Tarannum vs State of Odisha

Aziz Khan vs Delhi Pollution Control Committee (Dpcc)

News Item Published in the Hindu Authored by Shri Jacob Koshy Titled More River Stretches Are Now Critically Polluted: Cpcb vs Centeral Pollution Control Board

Sonya Gosh vs Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi

Arvind Singh vs Union of India

Sundr vs Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change

Mahavir Singh vs Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi

Ved Prakash Aggarwal vs Municipal Commissioner Nagar Nigam Ghaziabad

News Item Titled "Gurgaon a Groundwater ,Dark Zone, But Extraction Over 2 Times the Limit" Appearing in Times of India Dated 05.08.2025 vs

Rajender vs Union of India