Industry and project proponents secure 58.8% success rate as technical dismissals block nearly half of all appeals, SAREL report finds
New Delhi: The National Green Tribunal (NGT), established as a critical pillar of environmental justice in India, delivered no favourable judgments to environmental groups and public-interest parties in any of the 16 merit appeals it heard during the first six months of 2026, according to an analysis by the South Asian Reporter for Environment Laws (SAREL).
In stark contrast, project proponents, property owners and industry interests secured favourable outcomes in 30 of 51 merit appeals, recording a success rate of 58.8 per cent.
The findings raise serious questions about access to environmental justice and the balance of legal outcomes at a time when Chief Justice of India Surya Kant has called for a harmonious approach to conservation and development.
SAREL examined 119 appeals filed before the NGT’s five benches between January and June 2026. Of these, environmental and public-interest parties filed 16 merit appeals, while the industry, project-proponent and property-owner side filed 51.
Merit appeals refer to legal challenges in which the underlying dispute is finally adjudicated, rather than being disposed of on procedural or technical grounds.
The report highlights the significant role of procedural barriers in determining which cases reach substantive judicial scrutiny. More than 50 appeals were dismissed on technicalities or procedural grounds, while 44 per cent of all appeals were reportedly dismissed on issues including limitation, jurisdiction, maintainability or withdrawal without a ruling on the merits.
The disparity in outcomes is particularly pronounced in the comparison between public-interest and industry-related appeals. According to the SAREL analysis, none of the 16 merit appeals filed by the public-interest side resulted in a favourable judgment.
Meanwhile, industry and project proponents won 30 of their 51 merit appeals, while a further six per cent of their cases resulted in the status quo being maintained.
The bench-wise figures reveal varying outcomes across the tribunal’s regional jurisdictions. At the Principal Zone Bench in Delhi, the industry, project-proponent and property-owner side won five of 10 merit appeals.
The Western Zone Bench in Pune recorded 15 favourable outcomes out of 24 appeals, while the Southern Zone Bench in Chennai saw the industry side win nine of 12 merit appeals. At the Central Zone Bench in Bhopal, the side won one of five appeals.
The Eastern Zone Bench in Kolkata decided only one matter during the six-month period—a public-interest appeal that was disposed of and dismissed. No project-proponent appeals were decided by the bench during this period.
The report’s findings come against the backdrop of remarks by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant at the inauguration of the NGT’s two-day international conference, The Future of Environment and Climate Dynamics, held in New Delhi.
Addressing the gathering, the CJI emphasised that Indian courts must reconcile environmental conservation with development rather than treat them as opposing objectives. Describing the Supreme Court as the “banyan tree” of environmental justice, Kant said,”At present, the question before our courts is no longer conservation versus development, but rather how the two can be harmonised and sustained together.”
The contrast between this vision and the appeal outcomes documented by SAREL underlines the continuing challenge of ensuring that environmental disputes receive substantive judicial consideration.
While the report does not establish the reasons behind every outcome or demonstrate that the tribunal systematically favoured one category of litigants, its findings draw attention to the role of procedural filters and the distribution of favourable judgments.
The data also underscores the importance of examining how limitation rules, jurisdictional objections and maintainability requirements affect access to environmental adjudication. For environmental organisations and affected communities, the ability to have their cases heard on merit remains central to the effective enforcement of environmental protections.
As the NGT continues to navigate the competing demands of development and conservation, the SAREL analysis brings renewed scrutiny to whether environmental justice is being delivered equally across the tribunal’s legal proceedings.
