Supreme Court To Address Delhi's Severe Pollution On Monday; Amicus Curiae Raises Concerns Over Lack of Pre-emptive Action

The Supreme Court will address the issue of severe level of air pollution in Delhi-NCR on Monday.

Senior Advocate Aparajita Singh, acting as amicus curiae mentioned the matter today before a bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih, raising concerns over worsening air quality, noting that Delhi has once again reached a “severe” pollution level.

Singh said that the Court has previously permitted pre-emptive actions to prevent such high pollution levels, but no action has been taken by the authorities.

“Since yesterday we are on severe. Just to avoid this situation this court had permitted them to take pre-emptive action. Why do we want to become the most polluted city in the world before we take action? I have given notice to CAQM, let the CAQM come and explain”, Singh submitted.

The Court has been dealing with air pollution by various sources such as stubble burning, firecrackers, vehicular pollution, garbage burning, industrial pollution etc. So far, orders have been passed regarding stubble burning and firecrackers, with the other issues to be considered in the coming days.

The Court has earlier expressed dissatisfaction over the enforcement of a firecracker ban in Delhi. On November 11, the Court, emphasizing that no religion endorses pollution-generating practices, observed that every citizen has a fundamental right to a pollution-free environment under Article 21 of the Constitution. The bench criticised the Delhi Police for not taking the Delhi Government's October 14 ban on firecrackers seriously.

Noting that pollution levels in the National Capital Region surged after Diwali, the Court criticized the delay by Delhi government in notifying the ban and directed the Delhi Police to inform all license holders and online vendors about the prohibition on firecracker sales. The Court ordered the establishment of a special cell to enforce the ban, holding Station House Officers accountable for compliance.

Additionally, the Court has been dealing with the issue of air pollution Delhi from stubble burning in the states of Punjab and Haryana, and non-compliance of CAQM orders on ban on stubble burning. The Court has noted that the states had failed to prosecute officials who had disregarded CAQM's directives, instead merely issuing show-cause notices. The Court, citing Section 14 of the CAQM Act, urged that the district magistrates in these states initiate prosecutions for violations.

The Court had also questioned the effectiveness of the Environment Protection Act (EPA), 1986, as amended by the Jan Vishwas Act in 2023, which replaced punitive actions with penalties, leading to the act becoming “toothless” due to centre's inaction in creating an enforcement mechanism. Subsequently, the Court directed states to begin imposing penalties under Section 15 of the Environment Protection Act, after being informed about the appointment of adjudicating officers for enforcing the provision. 

On stubble burning, the Supreme Court directed Punjab and Haryana to address farmers' grievances related to inadequate machinery for stubble management. The Court has emphasized that Section 15 of the CAQM Act mandates the Commission to impose environmental compensation on those responsible for air pollution, especially as penal provisions do not apply to farmers.

Further, the Court has held that stubble burning infringes citizens' fundamental right to a pollution-free environment. Criticizing the limited actions against violators, the Court observed that nominal fines have failed to curb stubble burning and that there appears to be political reluctance to take strict action against farmers.

The Court will hear the issue of pollution caused by vehicles on November 25, 2024. The issue of the Court's directions regarding color-coded vehicle stickers is set for further consideration on January 3, 2025.

Case no. – WP (C) 13029/1985

Case Title – MC Mehta v. Union of India