The Supreme Court has directed that three judicial members of the National Green Tribunal (NGT) will continue to function beyond their retirement dates. The Court issued this direction as an interim measure to prevent disruption in the Tribunal’s work.
A Bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan noted that imminent vacancies would seriously affect the Tribunal’s effective functioning across multiple locations.
The Court said that the absence of judicial members would restrict access to justice for litigants.
“In the circumstances, pending further appointments…we direct that Justice Arun Kumar Tyagi, Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana, and Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh shall continue to function as judicial members of the NGT,” the Bench stated.
Petition Filed by NGT Bar Association
The order came in a writ petition filed by the NGT Bar Association (Western Zone). The petition sought directions for timely appointments of judicial members, as required under Section 4 of the National Green Tribunal Act.
The petitioner argued that delays in appointments could leave the Tribunal without judicial members.
As a result, the Tribunal’s functioning would suffer.
Retirements and Vacancies Highlighted Before the Court
The petitioner placed a chart before the Court showing the retirement schedule of judicial members.
It pointed out that one judicial member was already serving on an extension of over three years.
Additionally, three other members are due to retire in March and April 2026. This would leave only one judicial member continuing on extension until fresh appointments are made.
The details are as follows:
- Justice Sheo Kumar Singh was appointed on March 16, 2020. He received an extension on January 16, 2023.
- Justice Arun Kumar Tyagi was appointed on March 25, 2022. He was due to retire on March 24, 2026.
- Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana was appointed on March 30, 2022. She was due to retire on March 29, 2026.
- Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh was appointed on April 14, 2022. He was due to retire on April 13, 2026.
The petitioner warned that without judicial members, the NGT would operate only with expert members.
Such a situation would violate Section 4(4) of the NGT Act, 2010.
Section 4 requires that the number of judicial members hearing a matter must equal the number of expert members.
Union Refers to Madras Bar Association Judgment
Additional Solicitor General Vikram Banerjee referred to the Supreme Court’s judgment dated November 19, 2025 in Madras Bar Association v. Union of India.
He submitted that the Court had directed the creation of a National Tribunals Commission.
Therefore, the Union was working towards implementing that mechanism. For this reason, it had not processed further tribunal appointments.
Supreme Court Notes Serious Impact on NGT Functioning
The Bench observed that at least three vacancies would soon arise.
It said this would adversely affect the NGT’s functioning at five different locations across the country.
“Such a situation cannot be permitted to occur,” the Court remarked.
Stopgap Extension Granted
Accordingly, the Supreme Court directed that the following members shall continue functioning as judicial members of the NGT until further orders or new appointments:
- Justice Arun Kumar Tyagi
- Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana
- Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh
The Court also directed the Union of India to comply with the directions issued in the Madras Bar Association judgment.
Case: NGT Bar Association (Western Zone) v. Union of India & Ors.
