The Chief Justice of India, NV Ramana, on Wednesday, reproached the ‘inertia’ of bureaucracy that waits for the court to pass orders, from stopping vehicles to dousing fires, to clean the Capital’s polluted air.

Justice Surya Kant, on the Bench, in his turn, noted that people sitting in five-star and seven-star hotels in Delhi cannot blame farmers for stubble burning and need to understand their plight.

Measures adopted

Justice DY Chandrachud asked if the government had any positive steps in hand that would help immediately clear the smog enveloping the Capital. The Bench raised doubts about the efficacy of the measures adopted by the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) in the National Capital Region and adjoining areas in an emergency meeting.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said Meteorological Department scientists, who were part of the emergency meeting, had assured that the “situation would be better after November 21”.

He suggested waiting till then before taking harsh steps like a complete lockdown in the Capital.

“So, you are saying nature will come to the rescue by November 21?” Justice Kant queried.

“In the entire country, what I have observed as a Judge, and earlier as an Advocate General, is that the bureaucracy has developed an inertia, an apathy... They wait for the court to pass an order even on how to stop a car or a fire by using a bucket or a mop... This is the attitude developed by the Executive. The meeting should have decided on the steps and said these are our directions to be implemented. We could have completed this hearing in two minutes... It is unfortunate the Executive has come to this... They just say ‘let the court pass the order and we will sign’,” said Chief Justice Ramana towards the end of the hearing. The CJI said the court would consider the prospect of ordering a complete shutdown after November 21, but asked why the government had not taken steps earlier to rein in industrial activity, construction debris, which spew pollutants 365 days a year, unlike stubble burning, which is only a seasonal occurrence. Mehta acknowledged that “something has been done and more needs to be done”.

‘Nasty utterances’

The law officer complained of “nasty and irresponsible utterances” made in the media that he had submitted in the last hearing that stubble burning contributed only 10 per cent to the pollution. He said the government affidavit had clearly pegged the impact of farm fires at 35 per cent to 40 per cent in October and November.

“Debates on TV are creating more pollution... Statements are made out of context. Everybody has their own agenda... Let us focus on a solution here,” the CJI advised.

Justice Kant, referring to stubble burning, said the question was not about percentage.

“Irrespective of whether it contributes 10 per cent or 5 per cent, what is the plight of the farmers... What prompts them to resort to stubble burning? Under what circumstances they do that? People sitting in Delhi in five-star and seven-star hotels should not blame farmers and need to understand them...” said Justice Kant.

“We cannot penalise the farmers. We have asked the States to persuade the farmers against stubble burning... Farmers do not have the money... Firecrackers also see a spurt after Diwali for 10 to 15 days... Can you say firecrackers is not a contributor to pollution?” the CJI asked the government.

“Every October and November we assemble on this problem of pollution. Everytime the court has to take the initiative,” said Justice Kant.

The debate started shortly after Mehta briefed the court about measures adopted by the CAQM to curb pollution caused by industry, thermal power plants, dust, vehicular transport, including entry of trucks carrying non-essential goods, into Delhi. Mehta said schools and colleges have been closed in Delhi. Work from home was encouraged.

The court asked why Central government employees have to come to work in Delhi.

“You do not need 100 per cent staff, all come coming in their cars. You had restricted during Covid. Instead of 100 people coming, you can have 50,” the CJI asked.

Mehta said restricting attendance at Central government offices in Delhi would have pan-India ramifications. The contribution to pollution caused by Central government employees attending office would only be minimum. The law officer said the government was open to car pooling and arranging public transport for them.

The Delhi government said it has already done 90 per cent of what the Air Quality Commission has adopted. In fact, senior advocate AM Singhvi, for Delhi, said the steps recommended by the Commission was modelled on Delhi.

Justice Chandrachud asked about the number of mechanised road sweepers purchased in the Capital. Previously, the court had found that only 69 sweepers were operational.

Singhvi said the municipal corporations have asked for 15 and the government has assured financial support.

“Just 15 for thousands of km?” Justice Chandrachud asked.

Justice Kant, referring to a measure to ban vehicles above 10 to 15 years old from Delhi roads, asked how long it would take to even identify these vehicles.

“We are talking about immediate measures... Why can’t you insist only on public transport plying for now. Stop private vehicles,” Justice Kant suggested.

Justice Kant, again, asked who would be responsible for stopping trucks and high-end cars in Delhi.

The court however acknowledged Singhvi's submission that Delhi's measures would be fruitful only if the peripheral States join in the effort.

Haryana, like Delhi, claimed to have implemented 90 per cent of the measures, including work from home.

Punjab said it has formed over a 1000 teams to travel to villages and stop farm fires, at times extinguishing them.

“And what happens to the stubble left in the fields? Have you left farmers to the mercy of God?” Justice Kant asked.

The Punjab counsel said it was in the process of purchasing more machines to remove the stubble. It said the state is working hard to change the "mindset" of the farmers. It said the number of farm fires has considerably lessened.

Senior advocate Vikas Singh said the problem of stubble burning was endemic. He said the problem started in 2016, which saw the highest farm fires, and this year threatens to echo 2016. He said farmers need to be compelled to switch over to stubble remove machines as burning was not good for them in the long run.

“Delhi is gasping,” said Singh. The court scheduled the next hearing on November 24.

comment COMMENT NOW