The National Green Tribunal (NGT) was established in 2010 to provide effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental protection and conservation of forests and other natural resources. While its mandate is crucial, the statement that it is viewed by many critics as a hindrance to economic development holds some truth, but a comprehensive evaluation reveals a more nuanced picture.

Arguments Supporting the View (NGT as a Hindrance):

1. Project Delays and Cost Escalations: Critics argue that the NGT's strict interpretation of environmental laws, issuance of stop-work orders, and demands for rigorous environmental impact assessments (EIAs) often lead to significant delays in infrastructure, industrial, and mining projects. These delays can result in substantial cost overruns, making projects economically unviable or less attractive to investors.
2. Regulatory Uncertainty: The NGT's proactive stance and sometimes broad interpretations of environmental statutes can create a sense of unpredictability for businesses and investors, making it difficult to plan long-term projects with confidence.
3. Impact on Specific Sectors: Sectors like real estate, mining, and manufacturing, which have a direct interface with environmental regulations, often face the brunt of NGT's directives, leading to temporary shutdowns or permanent closures of units.
4. Perceived Overreach: Some critics contend that the NGT occasionally oversteps its judicial boundaries, venturing into policy-making or administrative functions, which can create friction with executive bodies and further complicate project clearances.

Arguments Against the View (NGT as a Facilitator of Sustainable Development):

1. Ensuring Sustainable Development: The NGT's primary role is to ensure that economic development is sustainable and does not come at the cost of irreversible environmental degradation. By enforcing environmental norms, it prevents short-sighted economic gains that could lead to long-term ecological and economic disasters.
2. Protecting Public Health and Well-being: Environmental pollution has significant economic costs in terms of public health (healthcare expenses, loss of productivity) and quality of life. The NGT's actions to curb pollution directly contribute to a healthier workforce and reduced public expenditure on health, which are economic benefits.
3. Resource Conservation: By protecting forests, water bodies, and biodiversity, the NGT safeguards natural resources that are fundamental inputs for various economic activities, including agriculture, tourism, and industries. This ensures resource availability for future generations.
4. Promoting Responsible Business Practices: The NGT holds polluters accountable, compelling industries to adopt cleaner technologies and more responsible waste management practices. While this might increase initial costs, it fosters innovation and leads to more efficient and environmentally friendly production processes in the long run.
5. Enhancing India's Global Image: Adherence to environmental standards improves India's standing on global platforms, potentially attracting environmentally conscious foreign investments and facilitating trade.
6. Precautionary Principle: The NGT often applies the precautionary principle, which dictates that if there is a threat of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation. This proactive approach prevents future economic liabilities.

Conclusion: While the NGT's interventions can indeed cause short-term disruptions, project delays, and increased compliance costs for certain economic activities, viewing it solely as a hindrance to economic development is a narrow perspective. Its role is crucial in ensuring that economic growth is environmentally sound and socially equitable. By upholding environmental laws, the NGT acts as a vital check against unchecked exploitation, promoting a model of sustainable development that secures long-term economic prosperity and ecological balance. The perceived 'hindrance' is often a necessary friction to steer development towards a more responsible and resilient path.