The Supreme Court on Friday pulled up the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) for failing to take adequate steps to curb pollution in Delhi and adjacent areas.
A Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Augustine George Masih said that although the panel has taken some steps, it has fallen short of the Court's expectations in discharging its functions, more so when it vast powers including the power to close down polluting units.
"We cannot say that commission has not taken any action but Amicus is right in saying that it has not performed the way it was expected to ... We are of the view that though Commission has taken certain steps, the Commission needs to be more active and must ensure that its efforts and directions actually translate into reducing the problem of pollution," the Court said.
The Court added that the CAQM may not be holding sufficient meetings and was hardly issuing enough directions to tackle violations of environmental norms.
"The Chairperson present today through VC (says) that 3 sub committees are holding only 1 meeting every 3 months. They have been assigned important tasks. We wonder how they are performing those tasks by meeting only once in three months!" the Court said.
The Court also reiterated that stubble burning, which has been pinpointed as a major reason for the pollution and declining air standards in Delhi, must stop.
Stubble burning refers to the practice of farmers setting fire to straw stubble which remains in fields after the harvest of grains like wheat and paddy. The stubble is burnt to prepare the fields for the next set of crops. It is the easiest and cheapest way to clear the fields but leads to a drastic dip in air quality.
For stubble burning to stop, it is crucial that alternatives to stubble burning are implemented on the ground, the Court said today.
"Efforts needs to be taken to make sure that use of stubble burning alternative equipment are used at grassroots level," the Court said.
The Supreme Court was hearing a case concerning air pollution in Delhi.
It had recently sought an explanation from the CAQM on what measures were being taken to against those violating restrictions on stubble burning in the country.
Amicus Curiae and Senior Advocate Aparajita Singh submitted today that the air quality panel was not doing enough to tackle the issue.
"What effective action are they taking? ... If it is still continuing year after year, then these are not answers," she said.
Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati appeared for the CAQM and the Central government. She told the Court that the CAQM has been trying very hard to act against the environmental lapses.
The Court, however, was not convinced and asked the CAQM to file a better affidavit in the matter by the next hearing on October 3.
"We would like to know from the commission about the subcommittee meetings and decisions issued thereunder. It must ensure that the equipment to avoid stubble burning are actually used by the farmers," the Court said.
The Court added that other issues flagged by the amicus today would be examined during another hearing scheduled on October 18.
In the same case, another Bench of the Supreme Court had earlier exhorted all stakeholders to cooperate to tackle air pollution and stubble burning in Punjab, Haryana, Delhi and Uttar Pradesh so that the air quality index in these States during the next winter improves.
In November 2023, the Court strongly suggested that the practice of stubble burning should be stopped altogether, adding that schemes like odd-even days for vehicles (a scheme initiated by the AAP-led Delhi government) to combat air pollution are mere optics.
The Court also criticised delays by the Delhi government in implementing the Regional Rapid Transport System (RRTS) projects, which is touted to be a more eco-friendly mode of transportation.
Later, the Court observed that registering criminal cases against farmers who burn paddy stubble is not a solution to tackle the ensuing air pollution.
Instead, the government should consider withholding minimum support prices (MSP) to such farmers for their crops, the Court had suggested.
[Read Live Coverage]