SC raps CAQM over delay, lack of clarity on Delhi pollution

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday came down sharply on the central pollution watchdog, holding that it was “failing in its duty” by seeking repeated time while Delhi and the National Capital Region continue to reel under severe air pollution. The court refused to grant a two-month adjournment sought by the Commission for Air Quality Management, saying the authority appeared to lack urgency in identifying the causes behind the worsening Air Quality Index and in proposing durable remedies.

Hearing a public interest litigation on air pollution, a bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi directed the Commission for Air Quality Management to convene a meeting of experts within two weeks and submit a report pinpointing the major contributors to the deteriorating air quality in Delhi NCR. The bench said it would not adjourn the matter beyond that period and would hear the issue on a continuous basis. The court was examining, among other issues, the question of temporary closure or relocation of toll plazas at Delhi’s borders to ease traffic congestion. On December 17 last year, it had asked the National Highways Authority of India and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi to explore that option, noting the link between congestion, heavy vehicles and pollution. On Tuesday, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for the pollution panel, referred to meetings held with stakeholders and sought two months’ time to respond on the toll plaza issue. The bench declined the request.

“Have you been able to identify the causes of pollution? Heavy vehicles are contributing a large part, so the first question is how do we address that,” the bench observed orally, adding that holding a meeting on January 2 and returning after two months was unacceptable. It said substantial material was already in the public domain, with experts and citizens sending inputs to the court, yet the authority had not crystallised a clear approach.

The judges also expressed dissatisfaction with affidavits filed by civic bodies. They noted that the Municipal Corporation of Delhi had defended toll plazas primarily as a source of revenue rather than suggesting solutions. The Gurugram Metropolitan Development Authority, the court said, had moved an application seeking 50 per cent of the environment compensation charge generated at various locations in Gurugram.

“Instead of bringing any concrete plan or proposal for visible long-term remedial measures, the status report does not reflect seriousness,” the bench said, adding that the pollution panel appeared to be in no hurry to identify causes or solutions. The court said it was therefore compelled to issue directions to expedite both exercises.

During the hearing, broader issues of vehicle ownership and mobility were also discussed. Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi suggested that reducing multiple car ownership could help address pollution, pointing to the power of the automobile industry. Responding, the Chief Justice remarked that the car had become a status symbol, with people saving money to buy four-wheelers after giving up bicycles. “The rich people should also sacrifice. Instead of going for high-end vehicles, they should go for good electric vehicles,” he said.

At the same time, the bench cautioned against abrupt policy shifts. It said there could not be a one-time decision such as mandating electric vehicles without examining the impact on the public exchequer, though better alternatives could be introduced gradually under a phased long-term plan.

The case arises from a petition filed by environmentalist M C Mehta, which has been listed for further directions on January 21. In an earlier hearing on December 17, the court had described the pollution crisis as an “annual feature” and called for practical responses. It had also modified its interim order of August 12 to allow authorities to take coercive action against older vehicles that do not meet Bharat Stage IV emission standards, underscoring the urgency of tackling a problem that returns every year.