New Delhi:Against the backdrop of rampant stubble burning in neighbouring states of the capital, the Supreme Court on Wednesday reminded the Centre and state governments of the right of citizens' to live with dignity and in a pollution-free environment.
It pulled up the Centre for rendering the Environmental Protection Act "toothless" through amendments and the provision of Section 15, which required prosecution of the wrongdoers is substituted by a provision of recovery of penalty.
The apex court stressed that the Commission for Air Quality Management in the National Capital Region and Adjoining Areas Act of 2021 (CAQM Act) was enacted without creating the required machinery for implementing the provision to curb air pollution.
A three-judge bench led by Justices Abhay S Oka, and comprising Justices Ahsanuddin Amanulllah and Augustine George Masih said the Centre and state governments should recognise that there is a fundamental right of every citizen under Article 21 of the Constitution of India to live in a pollution-free environment.
The air quality in the national capital was recorded in the "very poor" category, with several areas falling into the "severe" zone on Wednesday.
Justice Oka, pronouncing the order, said these are not a matter of only implementing the existing laws, these are matters of blatant violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Justice Oka stressed that governments have to address the question of how they are going to protect the right of citizens to live with dignity and a pollution-free environment.
"Therefore, it is high time that governments and all authorities note that this litigation is not an adversarial litigation. This litigation is only to ensure that laws related to the environment are strictly complied with so that constitutional rights of citizens are upheld”, said Justice Oka.
The Chief Secretaries of both Haryana and Punjab were present in the court and made submissions before the bench regarding the steps taken to curb the menace of stubble burning.
The bench said what precise action has been taken by a large number of officers is specifically not placed on record. Haryana Chief Secretary said instances of stubble burning have been reduced considerably.
Justice Oka said in the case of both governments, Haryana and Punjab, we find that selective action has been taken and in some cases, governments are claiming that they have recovered the compensation and in a few cases, they are claiming that they have registered FIRs, and the environmental compensation stated to be recovered is minimal.
Justice Oka said another serious issue is flagged in the compliance affidavit filed by the state of Punjab, where court's attention was invited to the amendment made to Section 15 of the Environment Protection Act. Section 15 provided for violation of a provision of the Act, the order passed, and rules framed, as an offence.
The bench said now the provision of Section 15, which required prosecution of the wrongdoers is substituted by provision of recovery of penalty.
"The provision has been rendered completely ineffective due to inaction on the part of the Government of India," said Justice Oka, adding that no appointment of adjudicating officer has been made, though a period of more than 6 months has elapsed, and the law enforcing machinery cannot impose penalty under Section 15.