Supreme Court summons Punjab, Haryana top officials over lack of action against stubble burning

The Supreme Court on Wednesday summoned the Chief Secretaries of the Punjab and Haryana governments after expressing severe disapproval over the lack of proper legal action against stubble burning in the State [In Re: Commission for Air Quality Management].

Stubble burning is the practice of farmers setting on fire the 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 fields but leads to a drastic dip in air quality, as per the experts.

A Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka, Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Augustine George Masih today noted that not a single prosecution had taken place against stubble burning incidents, despite the Court having earlier pulled up the States of Punjab and Haryana for such lapses.

"This is not a political matter. If Chief Secretary is acting at somebody's behest, we will issue summons against them as well. Next Wednesday we are going to physically call Chief Secretary and explain everything. Nothing has been done, same is with Punjab. The attitude is of complete defiance," the Court said.

On the Haryana government counsel's statement that 17 cases had been registered, the Court said,

"But that is under some provision of BNS. Nothing under the provision required. We are telling you very clearly. We will give you 1 week and if not complied, we will issue contempt against Chief Secretary. Why are you shy of prosecuting people?"

It noted that the State of Haryana was also only imposing nominal fines against those engaging in stubble burning.

"You are just taking a nominal fine only. ISRO is telling you location where fire was taking place and you say that you do not find anything. 191 cases of breach and only nominal fine taken. Absolute defiance of direction by commission under Section 12 of Commission of Air Quality Management in NCT region Act 2021. Complete defiance by Haryana," the Court lamented.

The Court proceeded to call for the presence of officials from the Punjab and Haryana governments to examine these issues.

"What has to be done by this approach of State Governments of not taking penal action against violators? Maybe they want to help someone. We are not concerned with it. Advocate General of Punjab has said in so many words that it is not possible to prosecute and if that is so, people will keep paying nominal fine and get away with it. Just few thousand rupees pay and then continue stubble burning. Let Chief Secretaries be present on Wednesday. States are bound by directions," the Court said.

The Court was hearing a case concerning air pollution in Delhi.

It had earlier pulled up the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) in the National Capital Region and Adjoining Areas for failing to take adequate steps to curb pollution.

Today, the Court asked the CAQM about the provisions available for taking action against officers for failing to discharge their functions.

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aishwarya Bhati assured that action would be taken. The Court proceeded to add in its order that the should Commission take action against erring State officials.

"Commission will make a statement about coercive action taken against State officials," it ordered.

Punjab

While dealing with the situation in Punjab, the Court told the Advocate General Gurminder Singh that for the past three years, not a single person had been prosecuted.

"Only nominal fine. Nothing has been done," it observed.

Singh in a candid submission said that the person at the end of the tail is a farmer. However, the Court took exception to the argument.

"Then why did not you challenge the Action plan if you don't want to comply with it? Burning of paddy straw/stubble burning is going on and you don't want to do anything under the Air Prevention Act 1981. Air is getting polluted," the Court said.

It further went on to question whether the State had made any recommendation to the Centre for solving the crisis.

"Mr. Advocate General, tell us about the grant of funds, show us a single proposal you made to Central Government for ensuring tractors to farmers? Answer it clearly - have you mentioned any aspect of the requirement of funds for farmers?"

The Court added,

"Can this conduct be said to be bona-fide? Last time you proclaimed that Central Government is not hearing? Today we see that not a single proposal is made for tractors and diesel?"

The Advocate General submitted that it was practically very difficult to comply with the directions against farmers on ground.

"Last time our officers were treated badly there by the people," Singh said.

However, the Court said was not impressed by this submission.

"So you mean to say that let people suffer from air pollution because State is not able to comply with it," the Court remarked.

On the State seeking more time for taking action, the Court said,

"We don't have time. You have all time."

The Court proceeded to call for presence of the Chief Secretary of Punjab government during the next hearing of the matter.

"The order passed by Commission for Air Quality Management is 3 years old. We direct Chief Secretary of Punjab to be physically present and explain the defaults. We also direct the Commission to take penal action under Section 14 of 2021 Act," it directed.

Lack of qualification of Commission members

The Court also pointed out that members of the Commission (CAQM) lacked adequate qualifications when it comes to dealing with air pollution.

"We have immense respect for all of them but none is duly qualified or expert in the field of Air Pollution," Justice Oka observed.

The Bench was also dismayed over the number of officers who remained absent at a meeting of the CAQM's enforcement committee.

"About seven members were absent. The minutes were signed yesterday only. Also on the aspect of State Governments, your lordships have passed directions, we will take penal action," ASG Bhati assured.

Punjab's Advocate General also said that he will look into it.

"Milords as far as my instructions are there, the Additional Chief Secretary of Environment was there but with different designation. But we will find out if he was absent," AG Singh said.

In the order, the Court directed that action must be taken against such frequent absentees and also ordered the Commission to explain whether eminent experts are allowed to be part of committee meetings.

[Live Courtroom Exchange]