Enforcement Officer / Accounts Officer (EO/AO) 2020 recruitment test, advertisement 421. Transcribed from the Commission's own booklet (series A, NMJX-U-GTA); answer as per the official UPSC final answer key. This question is in Part B. Answer last reviewed 24 August 2026.

Which one of the following facts pertaining to the National Green Tribunal (NGT) is not correct ?

(a)The NGT was set up in the year 2010.
(b)Its purpose is to ensure effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental protection and conservation of forests and other natural resources.
(c)It is bound by the procedure laid down under the Code of Civil Procedure.
(d)It is guided by the principles of natural justice.

Answer

Why

Correct — C, (c) It is bound by the procedure laid down under the Code of Civil Procedure.

The word ‘not’ is printed in bold italic in the stem, so the question asks which of the four statements is FALSE. Three of them are accurate descriptions of the National Green Tribunal and this one is the reverse of the law.

Section 19(1) of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 settles it in a single sentence: ‘The Tribunal shall not be bound by the procedure laid down by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 but shall be guided by the principles of natural justice.’ The two halves of that sentence are the two options (c) and (d), and the paper has simply printed the second correctly and the first inverted.

Why the law is written that way is worth understanding, because it explains the whole design of the Tribunal. The Code of Civil Procedure prescribes an elaborate and slow sequence of pleadings, issues, evidence and argument, developed for private disputes between parties. Environmental harm does not wait for it. The Act therefore frees the Tribunal from that procedure, requires it instead to observe natural justice — a fair hearing, notice to the affected party and an unbiased decision-maker — and lets it regulate its own procedure under section 19(2). Section 19(3) similarly frees it from the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

There is one refinement that a candidate should hold alongside this, because examiners set items on it. Not being BOUND BY the Code is not the same as having no civil-court powers. Section 19(4) gives the Tribunal the same powers as a civil court under the Code for specific purposes — summoning witnesses and examining them on oath, requiring the discovery and production of documents, receiving evidence on affidavit, issuing commissions, reviewing its decisions, and passing ex parte and interim orders. So the Tribunal borrows the civil court’s POWERS while being released from the civil court’s PROCEDURE. Option (c) as printed asserts the opposite of the second half, and is the false statement the question is looking for.

Why the others are wrong

(a)The NGT was set up in the year 2010. — This statement is CORRECT, so it cannot be the answer to a question asking which is not correct. The National Green Tribunal Act is Act No. 19 of 2010 and received assent on 2 June 2010, and the Tribunal was set up in that year. Its principal bench sits at New Delhi, with regional benches at Bhopal, Pune, Kolkata and Chennai. On a negative question the danger with a true option is not that it looks wrong but that it looks unimportant — a candidate scanning for something objectionable may skim past a bare date. The discipline that works is to mark each option T or F in the margin before choosing, because on a ‘not correct’ item three of the four are statements worth learning in their own right.
(b)Its purpose is to ensure effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental protection and conservation of forests and other natural resources. — This statement is CORRECT and is very nearly the language of the Act itself. The long title of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 describes it as an Act to provide for the establishment of a National Green Tribunal for the effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental protection and conservation of forests and other natural resources, including the enforcement of any legal right relating to environment and giving relief and compensation for damages to persons and property. The option reproduces the operative phrase almost word for word, which is a useful signal in itself: when an option reads like statutory drafting rather than like a textbook summary, it has usually been lifted from the statute and is usually true.
(d)It is guided by the principles of natural justice. — This statement is CORRECT, and it is the second half of the very sentence that makes option (c) false. Section 19(1) says the Tribunal shall not be bound by the Code of Civil Procedure but shall be GUIDED BY THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. Those principles are the minimum guarantees of a fair hearing that apply even where no code of procedure does: that a person be heard before an adverse decision is taken against them, that they receive notice of the case they must meet, and that the decision-maker have no interest in the outcome. Read together, options (c) and (d) are the two halves of one statutory sentence, which is why noticing that they are related is the fastest route to the answer on this item.

Concept

The National Green Tribunal is a specialised tribunal for environmental disputes, established by the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, Act No. 19 of 2010, which received assent on 2 June 2010.

PROCEDURE. Section 19 is the heart of the design. Sub-section (1) frees the Tribunal from the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and binds it instead to the principles of natural justice. Sub-section (2) lets it regulate its own procedure. Sub-section (3) frees it from the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Sub-section (4) then gives it the same powers as a civil court under the Code for the specific purposes of summoning and examining witnesses on oath, discovery and production of documents, receiving evidence on affidavit, issuing commissions, reviewing its decisions, and passing ex parte and interim orders.

JURISDICTION. Under section 14 the Tribunal hears civil cases raising a substantial question relating to the environment that arise out of the seven enactments listed in Schedule I: the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974, the Water Cess Act 1977, the Forest (Conservation) Act 1980, the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981, the Environment (Protection) Act 1986, the Public Liability Insurance Act 1991 and the Biological Diversity Act 2002. Two well-known statutes are deliberately NOT in that Schedule — the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 and the Indian Forest Act 1927 — and that omission is itself a favourite examination point. An application must ordinarily be filed within six months of the cause of action, extendable by up to sixty days.

PRINCIPLES OF DECISION. Section 20 requires the Tribunal to apply the principles of sustainable development, the precautionary principle and the polluter pays principle. The preamble cites the Stockholm Conference of 1972 and the Rio Conference of 1992, and the right to a healthy environment read into Article 21 of the Constitution.

TIME AND APPEAL. Section 18(3) requires the Tribunal to endeavour to dispose of an application finally within six months of its filing. An appeal against its order lies to the Supreme Court within ninety days, on the grounds set out in section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

COMPOSITION AND SEATS. The Tribunal is headed by a chairperson who is a retired judge of the Supreme Court, with judicial members drawn from retired High Court judges and expert members holding professional qualifications and long experience in environment and forest conservation. Its principal bench sits at New Delhi and its regional benches at Bhopal, Pune, Kolkata and Chennai.

This item opens the polity, governance, environment and schemes block of Part B, and it is one of the questions on this paper that asks a NEGATIVE question — the stem prints ‘not’ in bold italic, and the candidate has to find the single false statement among four.

The negative form changes the work required. On an ordinary item a candidate can stop as soon as one option is recognised as right; here every option has to be tested, because the answer is defined by the failure of one rather than the success of one. The reliable method is to write T or F beside each option as it is read and only then to look for the odd one out. Candidates lose this item not by ignorance of the NGT but by reading (a) or (b), recognising it as true, and marking it because it was the first thing they were sure about.

The item is also built on a single sentence of the statute split into two options. Options (c) and (d) come from section 19(1), one reproduced faithfully and one inverted. That is a common construction in tribunal and commission questions, and noticing it is worth a mark: when two options in a set look like halves of the same rule, the fault, if there is one, is almost certainly in the pair.

For an EPFO candidate the underlying idea generalises well beyond the NGT. Tribunals across Indian law — the Central Administrative Tribunal, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the Employees’ Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal in its time — are typically released from the Code of Civil Procedure and bound to natural justice instead, and given selected civil-court powers by an express provision. Learning the pattern once answers the same question in several forms.

Key facts

The National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 is Act No. 19 of 2010; it received assent on 2 June 2010 and the Tribunal was set up in that year.
Section 19(1): the Tribunal shall NOT be bound by the procedure laid down by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, but shall be guided by the principles of natural justice.
Section 19(3) frees it from the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and section 19(2) lets it regulate its own procedure.
Section 19(4) nevertheless gives it the same powers as a civil court under the Code for summoning witnesses, discovery of documents, evidence on affidavit, commissions, review, and ex parte and interim orders.
Section 14 gives it jurisdiction over civil cases raising a substantial question relating to the environment arising out of the seven Schedule I enactments — Water 1974, Water Cess 1977, Forest Conservation 1980, Air 1981, Environment Protection 1986, Public Liability Insurance 1991 and Biological Diversity 2002.
The Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 and the Indian Forest Act 1927 are NOT in Schedule I.
Section 20 requires it to apply sustainable development, the precautionary principle and the polluter pays principle.
Section 18(3): it must endeavour to dispose of an application finally within six months of filing; an application must ordinarily be filed within six months of the cause of action, extendable by sixty days.
An appeal lies to the Supreme Court within ninety days of the order.
The chairperson is a retired judge of the Supreme Court; the principal bench sits at New Delhi and regional benches at Bhopal, Pune, Kolkata and Chennai.

Section 19(1) prints both halves — the paper has inverted one of them

(c) Bound by the Code of Civil Procedure — FALSE, and therefore the answer→Section 19(1) of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 reads: ‘The Tribunal shall NOT be bound by the procedure laid down by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 but shall be guided by the principles of natural justice.’ Options (c) and (d) are the two halves of that single sentence, the first printed inverted and the second printed correctly.

(d) Guided by the principles of natural justice — TRUE→The second half of the same sentence: a fair hearing, notice to the affected party, and an unbiased decision-maker — the minimum guarantees that apply even where no code of procedure does.

(a) Set up in 2010 — TRUE→The Act is No. 19 of 2010 and received assent on 2 June 2010. The principal bench sits at New Delhi, with regional benches at Bhopal, Pune, Kolkata and Chennai, and the chairperson is a retired judge of the Supreme Court.

(b) Effective and expeditious disposal — TRUE→Very nearly the language of the Act’s own long title: an Act to provide for the establishment of a National Green Tribunal for the effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental protection and conservation of forests and other natural resources.

Freed from the procedure, but not denied the powers→Section 19(2) lets the Tribunal regulate its own procedure and section 19(3) frees it from the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. But section 19(4) gives it the same powers as a civil court under the Code for summoning and examining witnesses on oath, discovery and production of documents, receiving evidence on affidavit, issuing commissions, reviewing its decisions, and passing ex parte and interim orders. It borrows the civil court’s POWERS while being released from its PROCEDURE.

Jurisdiction, and a favourite omission→Section 14 covers civil cases raising a substantial question relating to the environment under the seven Schedule I enactments — Water 1974, Water Cess 1977, Forest Conservation 1980, Air 1981, Environment Protection 1986, Public Liability Insurance 1991, Biological Diversity 2002. The Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 and the Indian Forest Act 1927 are NOT in that Schedule. Section 20 requires sustainable development, the precautionary principle and polluter pays.

Study next

Tribunals in India: Articles 323A and 323B, the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985, and the difference between a tribunal and a court.The principles of natural justice — audi alteram partem and nemo judex in causa sua — and their application to administrative and quasi-judicial bodies.The precautionary principle, the polluter pays principle and sustainable development as heads of Indian environmental law.The Environment (Protection) Act 1986 and the statutes in Schedule I to the NGT Act.Article 21 and the right to a healthy environment; Articles 48A and 51A(g).The Stockholm Conference 1972, the Rio Earth Summit 1992 and their influence on Indian environmental legislation.Central and State Pollution Control Boards, environmental clearance and environmental impact assessment.

Common traps

Missing the negative ask and marking the first option recognised as true. On a ‘not correct’ item every option must be tested.
Confusing being free of the Code of Civil Procedure with having no civil-court powers. Section 19(4) confers several such powers expressly.
Assuming a tribunal must follow the same procedure as a court. Most Indian tribunals are exempted from the Code and from the Evidence Act by their own statutes.
Adding the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 or the Indian Forest Act 1927 to Schedule I. Neither is listed.
Confusing the six-month limitation for FILING an application with the six-month period within which the Tribunal must endeavour to DISPOSE of one.
Assuming an appeal from the NGT goes to a High Court. It lies to the Supreme Court, within ninety days.

The NGT appears on EPFO EO/AO and other central papers as a statement-verification item of exactly this kind — three true propositions and one inverted — or as a single-fact question on its year, its composition, its benches or its appellate route. The inversion is nearly always made in a procedural clause rather than a factual one, because a date is hard to falsify convincingly while a rule of procedure can be reversed by deleting one word. That is why reading options (c) and (d) as a pair, and asking whether they can both be true of the same body, is the technique this item rewards.

Related PYQs

EPFO_EOAO_2020_Q40Open & attempt →

Which one of the following is not a correct description of the Namami Gange Programme ?

(a) It is an initiative of the Ministry of Jal Shakti.
(b) It primarily covers villages in the States of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Odisha.
(c) It aims to make villages on the banks of the river Ganga open defecation-free.
(d) It aims to transform some villages on the banks of the river Ganga as Ganga Grams.

Answer(b) It primarily covers villages in the States of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Odisha.

The other negative item in this block, on the Namami Gange Programme — the same instruction to find the single false statement, applied to a scheme rather than to a statute.

EPFO_EOAO_2020_Q37Open & attempt →

Which one of the following is the mandate of the Committee on Estimates ?

(a) It reports on what economies, improvements in organization, efficiency or administrative reform consistent with the policy underlying the estimates, may be effected.
(b) It scrutinizes appropriation and finance accounts of the Government.
(c) It examines reports of the Comptroller and Auditor General and whether public undertakings are run efficiently.
(d) It examines bills on matters of general public interest.

Answer(a) It reports on what economies, improvements in organization, efficiency or administrative reform consistent with the policy underlying the estimates, may be effected.

The parliamentary-committee item from this block, where the answer likewise turns on reproducing the mandate a rule actually confers rather than the one that sounds plausible.

Practice

practice — not a real PYQ
Under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, an appeal against an order of the Tribunal lies to which one of the following ?
- (a)The High Court having territorial jurisdiction
- (b)The Supreme Court, within ninety days
- (c)The Central Government, within sixty days
- (d)The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change
Answer(b) The Supreme Court, within ninety days — the appeal lies directly to the Supreme Court on the grounds set out in section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
practice — not a real PYQ
Which one of the following enactments is not listed in Schedule I to the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 ?
- (a)The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
- (b)The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
- (c)The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972
- (d)The Biological Diversity Act, 2002
Answer(c) The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 — Schedule I lists seven enactments, and the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 and the Indian Forest Act 1927 are both outside it.