NGT stays use of Forest Dept, pollution board funds by Punjab Govt

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has issued a notice to the state government and ordered a stay on the utilisation of the funds of Punjab Pollution Control Board (PPCB) and Forest and Wildlife Conservation Department till September 3, claimed the civil society group Public Action Committee (PAC).

The directions came after The Tribune, on August 8, highlighted how the state government had directed various departments to deposit a total of Rs 1,441.49 crore, including Rs 250 crore from the PPCB and Rs 84 crore from the Forest Department.

Taking cognisance of the news report, PAC, comprising environmentalists, approached the tribunal seeking a freeze on fund transfers. The Bench has now fixed the next hearing for September 3.

“These funds are meant exclusively for environmental protection and conservation, not for general state expenditure. The government must return or release such funds to the respective departments so that these can be used to fulfil statutory duties,” the PAC argued in its plea.

Going live from the NGT headquarters in New Delhi, PAC members Kapil Arora and Jaskirat Singh said, “Today, the matter regarding the Punjab Chief Secretary’s August 7 order for transfer of funds from the PPCB and the Department of Forest and Wildlife Conservation was heard by the Hon’ble Principal Bench of the NGT. After hearing our plea, the Bench issued a notice to the respondents and ordered a stay on utilising these funds till September 3.”

PAC representatives Kapil Arora and Kuldeep Singh Khaira, who appeared personally before the Bench, said once they learnt about the demand for immediate transfer of Rs 250 crore from the PPCB and Rs 84 crore from the Forest Department, they promptly approached the tribunal. They argued that such orders violated the directives of the Supreme Court, provisions of the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Act, and PUNCAMPA rules. The apex court had categorically mandated that such funds be used strictly for afforestation, wildlife protection and forest regeneration—not for administrative or unrelated purposes.

PAC member Dr Amandeep Singh Bains said the PPCB was an autonomous body and the funds available with it could only be utilised for environmental restitution and improvement.

Similarly, the Forest Department’s corpus consisted of money collected against tree felling and land transfers to other departments and it could be diverted for general use, he added.

“Funds generated for protecting ecology and ensuring regeneration cannot be treated as revenue under Articles 266 and 283 of the Constitution,” PAC members asserted.