The State of Andhra Pradesh vs. Raghu Ramakrishna Raju Kanumuru (M.P.)
Background
The State of Andhra Pradesh was rebuilding a resort at Rushikonda Hill near Visakhapatnam after demolishing the old structure. A Member of Parliament complained to the National Green Tribunal (NGT), which took up the matter and, on 6 May 2022, banned further construction pending a fresh expert report, even though an earlier four-member expert committee had found no violation, and even though the Andhra Pradesh High Court was already hearing a separate PIL on the same construction and had earlier allowed work to continue in line with existing environmental permissions. The NGT also refused to lift its construction ban when the State asked it to.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court held that once the High Court, a constitutional court, was already seized of the same dispute and had passed its own order permitting construction, it was not appropriate for the NGT, a statutory tribunal subordinate to the High Court's territorial jurisdiction, to continue parallel proceedings on the same cause of action. Relying on L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India and reiterating that orders of constitutional courts prevail over tribunal orders, the Court quashed the NGT proceedings and directed the parties to place all facts, including the expert committee's report, before the High Court for a fresh decision balancing development and environmental protection. Pending that, it allowed construction only on the area where the earlier structure had stood, and clarified it had expressed no opinion on the merits.
Lesson Learnt
When a High Court is already hearing a case on a particular subject matter, a statutory tribunal like the NGT should not proceed with parallel litigation on the same cause of action: orders of constitutional courts take precedence over tribunal orders, and conflicting directions from different forums must be avoided.