When the Basic Right to Breathe is Curtailed

It's not the courts' job to deal with issues like pollution. But with the executive continuing to show apathy towards the issue, the judiciary is forced to step in

- KALEESWARAM RAJ

The Supreme Court has actively intervened in the air pollution crisis in Delhi and surrounding areas ever since 1984. In M C Mehta vs Union of India, the Court has been taking a proactive role till date. During this winter too, when the air pollution reached hazardous levels, a bench headed by Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka issued significant directions. The court appointed commissioners to ensure trucks with construction material do not pass through Delhi checkpoints. It criticised the Commission for Air Quality Management for its lethargic attitude in the timely implementation of the Graded Response Action Plan.

The plan includes, among other things, prohibition of construction activities and curtailment of other human activities. Even a situation closer to a lockdown is contemplated under the plan. The court deliberated on the closure of schools and the plight of children. Also, there were deliberations on stubble burning, vehicle density and use of firecrackers.

The continued effort of the Supreme Court in the case is commendable. Yet, it remains an area where the executive and its agencies will have to finally act. The Court can only prompt them to act with judicial persuasion. The stark reality is that the situation on the ground has hardly improved and the AQI remains at a dangerous level even in February this year.

The causes that made Delhi and the neighbouring areas uninhabitable are manyfold. They include road dust, vehicular emissions, tyre/brake wear and tear, urban solid waste, industrial and thermal plant emissions, stubble burning from neighbouring states, etc. The topography of Delhi and surrounding areas, coupled with meteorological factors like reduced temperature, low wind speed and lesser amount of rainfall, intensify the crisis.