M.C. MEHTA versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

M.C. MEHTA

v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JULY 28, 1998

[DR. A.S. ANAND, B.N. KIRPAL AND V.N. KHARE, JJ.]

Environmental Pollution:

Vehicular pollution in Delhi-Directions given by Supreme Court earlier to arrest and control vehicular pollution-Implementation of-Report of Bhure Lal Committee giving time frame for immediate improvement of air quality-Approved-Further directions given by Court to arrest the growing pollution of air and to implement Bhure Lal Committee Report-Compliance report to be filed in the Court.

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition (C) No. 13029 of 1986 Etc.

Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.

Altaf Ahmed, Additional Solicitor General, Harish N. Salve, (A.C.), P.P. Malhotra, Shanti Bhushan, K. Parasaran, Uday Umesh Lalit, Manoj Prasad, Kailash Vasdev, Mrs. Indira Sawhney, Arvind K. Sharma, Mrs. Anubha Jain, Mrs. K.P. Mittal, Mrs.Niranjana Singh, Wasim A. Quadari, Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Ms. Smitha Inna, D.S. Mehra, Pramod B.Agarwala, Ms. Praveena Gautam, Aruneshwar Gupta, Srilok Nath Rath, Shri Narain, Sandeep Narain, Suishil Kumar Jain, A.P. Dhamija, Ms. Kiran, Ms. Arpita Roy Choudhary, Sanjay Katayal,Vineet Kumar, (Rajeev Dutta) (NP), (M.A. Chinnaswamy,) (NP), R.P. Gupta, R. Sasiprabhu, R.K. Maheshwari, Ashok Mathur, Ranjit Kumar, Ejaz Maqbool, Hardeep Singh Anand, Vijay Panjwani, Anis Ahmed Khan, L.K. Pandey, S.B. Upadhyay, S.R. Setia, Sanjay Parikh, Mahabir Singh and Dinesh Kumar Garg for the appearing Parties.

The following Order of the Court was delivered :

Realising the urgency and importance of protection and improvement of the environment, this Court has given direction from time to time and impressed upon the authorities to take urgent steps to tackle the acute problem of vehicular pollution in Delhi. Assurances have been held out to the Court 918

M.C. MEHTA v. U.0.1.

through various affidavits filed by the competent officers that effective steps shall be taken in phased manner within specified time span. Inspite of the · matter having engaged the attention of this Court for long time and lengthy debates on each hearing, precious little appear to have been done by the State Administration to check and control the vehicular pollution. We are rather distressed at this apathy of the State Administration, wherr according to the White Paper published by the Government of India, tJ{~ vehicular pollution contributes 70% of the air pollution as compared to 20% in 1970. In the White Paper published by the Government of India, iyaead line of I st April, 1998 had been proposed for implementation of major a,eiions. No concrete steps have however, been taken till date in spite of tho/'1'ssurances held out in the affidavit dated November 18, 1996. I

We find from the report submitted by the Authority appointed vide Gazette Notification dated 29th January, 1998 that none of the major actions, as proposed, has been implemented. The Authority headed by Shri Shure Lal has also proposed certain measures for immediate improvement of air quality and has given time frame but for the time being we are not engaging our attention to that time frame. We are, however, of the view that to arrest the growing pollution of air certain steps need to be taken immediately We, therefore, direct:-

f. Implementation of directions to restrict plying of commercial vehicles including taxis, which are 15 years old, by 2nd October, I 998.

2. Restriction on plying of goods vehicles during the day time shall be strictly enforced by I 5th August, I 998. 3. Expansion of pre-mixed oil dispensors (petrol and 2T oil) shall be undertaken by 31st December, 1998. 4. Ban on supply of loose 2T oils at petrol stations and service garages shall be enforced by 3 I st December, I 998.

The Committee headed by Shri Shure Lal has also proposed the following measures within the time frame in its action taken report filed in the Court.

Time frame.

M.C. MEHTA v. U.0.1.

media various directions issued by this Court from time to time in general and

the directions hereinabove contained in particular. Report in this behalf shall be filed in the Court within four weeks. We, administer, strong caution to all concerned that failure to abide any of the directions hereinabove noticed would invite action under the Contempt of Courts Act against the defaulters.

Petition still pending.