As per case facts, the petitioner, a silica sand mining firm, challenged an Environmental Clearance (EC) granted by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. The 7th respondent appealed ... this EC to the National Green Tribunal (NGT), which allowed the appeal, kept the EC in abeyance, and directed fresh consideration due to procedural irregularities and non-compliance with environmental guidelines, including a lack of proper studies on ecological impact and replenishment. The petitioner then filed a Writ Petition in the High Court, challenging the NGT order, arguing that the 7th respondent was not an 'aggrieved person' to file the NGT appeal, the NGT's order was without jurisdiction, and it violated principles of natural justice. The question arose whether the writ petition was maintainable, if the NGT's order was without jurisdiction or violated natural justice, and if the High Court should interfere. Finally, the High Court held that the writ petition is maintainable, but the 7th respondent, as a resident of the affected village, is indeed an 'aggrieved person' under the NGT Act, making the NGT's order within jurisdiction. The High Court also found no violation of natural justice as the NGT, with its broad powers to protect the environment and taking suo motu cognizance of relevant aspects, remitted the matter for fresh consideration where the petitioner can be heard. The NGT rightly interfered due to identified irregularities, including the lack of proper studies and the applicability of sand mining guidelines, and that prior ECs must conform to existing rules, making ex-post facto EC not routinely permissible. Therefore, no interference with the NGT order was warranted, and the writ petition was dismissed.