E-Paper
SC rejects urgent hearing on plea against farm fires
New Delhi: Not everything is judicially manageable, the Supreme Court remarked on Thursday as it declined to grant an urgent hearing to a public interest litigation (PIL) demanding fresh guidelines on stubble burning and other urgent steps to curb the rising air pollution
Prefer HTon Google
New Delhi: Not everything is judicially manageable, the Supreme Court remarked on Thursday as it declined to grant an urgent hearing to a public interest litigation (PIL) demanding fresh guidelines on stubble burning and other urgent steps to curb the rising air pollution.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud expressed his indisposition to assign an immediate date of hearing to the PIL filed by advocate Shashank Shekhar Jha, observing there are certain things which even a court cannot do.
Jha mentioned the matter before the CJI, complaining that his petition for issuance of fresh directives to check the worsening air quality in Delhi-NCR was supposed to come up for a hearing on November 10, but it was not listed.
“So, what’s your solution to this problem?” justice Chandrachud asked Jha, who responded that a ban on stubble burning needs to be imposed.
To this, the CJI retorted: “So, we ban it? You think, it is going to stop then? Can we enforce such a ban against every farmer across Punjab and Uttar Pradesh? Let’s have some genuine solutions. There are some things that courts can do and some things that they cannot...there are some things courts are not judicially equipped to do.”
While Jha urged the bench to take up his plea for a detailed hearing, justice Chandrachud was not inclined. “We have heard you. We are not going to take it up immediately,” said the CJI.
In north India’s food-bowl states, farmers set aflame paddy stalks around October to clear their fields for their next crop. This releases millions of tonnes of smoke, carbon dioxide and toxins leading to a deadly spell of air pollution in Delhi and the National Capital Region (NCR).
On November 4, upon a request made by Jha, previous CJI Uday Umesh Lalit had said that his petition would be listed for a hearing on November 10. On that day, the then CJI observed: “No doubt, the situation definitely requires intervention...but we are only on whether that intervention should be under Article 32 (a PIL to enforce fundamental rights).”
In his petition, Jha complained that the air quality index (AQI) in Delhi-NCR has crossed 500 on a few days recently while stubble burning in Delhi’s neighbouring states, especially Punjab, went on unabated despite several directives by the Supreme Court in the past to reduce the farm fires. AQI between zero and 50 is considered “good”, from 51 to 100 “satisfactory”, 101- 200 “moderate”, 201-300 “poor”, 301-400 “very poor”, and 401-500 “severe”.
To be sure, Delhi recorded the AQI of 447 on November 4 -- the highest this season so far -- according to the daily 4pm bulletin by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) that is taken as the day’s official reading.
According to data from the Punjab Remote Sensing Centre, Punjab has reported 36,761 stubble fires between September 15 and November 10 this year.
Citing statistics available in public domain, Jha flagged a rise of farm fires in Punjab by 21% between September 15 and October 31, adding the state has failed to take necessary steps to stop stubble burning which is the reason behind a thick layer of pungent smog over the national capital.
In his plea, Jha sought fresh guidelines for states in respect to stubble burning and appoint a panel under a retired Supreme Court judge to tackle pollution, chiefly to deal with stubble burning. He also sought a direction to states to install smog towers, carry out plantation drives, make available affordable public transport, and discourage use of private vehicles, among others.
