SC gives conditional nod to green crackers, asks Centre to devise mechanism

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday allowed certified manufacturers to produce green crackers on the condition that their sale is not carried in Delhi-NCR without approval. A bench headed by Chief Justice B R Gavai also asked the Centre to take a fresh look at the absolute ban on the manufacture of firecrackers in Delhi-National Capital Region (NCR). The bench, also comprising Justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria, directed the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) to consult all stakeholders, including the Delhi Government, manufacturers, and sellers, before arriving at a final decision. "In the meantime, we permit the manufacturers who are having the certification of green crackers as certified by NEERI (National Environmental Engineering Research Institute) as well as PESO (Petroleum and Explosives Safety Organisation) to manufacture. However, this will be subject to an undertaking by the manufacturers to this court that until further orders passed by this court, they would not sell any of their crackers in the prohibited areas," it ordered.

The conditional order permitting certified manufacturers to produce green crackers till the plea is heard again on October 8 on filing of the MoEFCC report on the issue assumes significance as earlier on April 3, a bench headed by former top court judge Justice A S Oka, refused to relax the ban on the manufacture, storage and sale on firecrackers in Delhi-NCR. Justice Oka had noted that air pollution levels remained alarming for a considerable time and a large section of the population worked on streets and was the worst affected by pollution. On Friday, the CJI-led bench batted for a balanced approach keeping in mind the right to livelihood of workers employed in such manufacturing units and the fact that such a complete ban is hardly implemented fully.

The orders were passed while hearing the 1985 PIL of MC Mehta relating to environmental concerns in Delhi-NCR. The bench said while curbing pollution was essential, an absolute ban was not “practical or ideal”. The court illustrated it with the prohibition on mining in Bihar, which inadvertently gave rise to powerful illegal mining mafias. “It will be appropriate that the Union of India comes forward with a solution after taking all the stakeholders, including the Delhi Government, the manufacturers and sellers of crackers, on board. As has been experienced, that despite there being a complete ban, the ban could not be implemented," the bench said. The order went on, “As was noticed by us in one of the judgments wherein in the State of Bihar, a complete ban on mining, had led to illegal mafias engaging in the business of mining. In that view of the matter, it is necessary that a balanced approach must be adopted." Senior advocate Balbir Singh and K Parmeswar, appearing for some manufacturing units, argued that the April 3 order, which extended the firecracker ban in NCR throughout the year instead of just during the winter pollution season, was in conflict with its 2018 judgment in the Arjun Gopal case. The bench declined to examine the issue at this stage. Parmeswar, however, urged the bench to permit manufacturing under strict monitoring, suggesting that companies could declare quantities publicly and make detailed disclosures to ensure compliance.

Senior advocate Aparajita Singh, who is amicus curiae, opposed the manufacture of crackers in NCR, cautioning it would inevitably lead to sales and illegal use within prohibited areas “What is the problem in allowing them to manufacture if they follow norms? There has to be a solution. Extreme orders will create problems. So let them manufacture and let there be no sale in NCR till further orders,” the CJI said. The bench said the ban was “hardly being followed on the ground". The bench directed Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for the Centre, to communicate its order to the MoEFCC and ensure that consultations with stakeholders are held before the next hearing. The CJI said while the fight against toxic air pollution remains paramount, livelihood concerns of workers and practical enforcement challenges must also guide the final policy.