The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to consider easing Graded Response Action Plan-IV (GRAP-IV) restrictions in the national capital on November 25. At the time of writing this report, the Centre for Air Quality Management (CAQM) had claimed the air quality in Delhi had entered a relatively easy-to-breathe GRAP-II stage in the past two days.
According to media reports, however, the air quality index (AQI) of the city exacerbated to 400 (severe) later in the evening.
A Bench headed by Justice AS Oka issued a rider that its call on Monday would depend on what its 13 Court Commissioners would report from their field visits to border entry points into the capital.
The court discovered on Friday that 100 out of the 113 entry points to the capital were left unmanned by the Delhi Police and State government, allowing polluting heavy trucks and vehicles registered outside Delhi to enter in violation of GRAP-IV ban.
‘No vigil at entry points’
“Approximately 100 entry points were left unmanned since the beginning of GRAP-IV stage on November 18. It is apparent that, notwithstanding the orders of the Supreme Court and the directions of the CAQM, there was a failure on the part of the Delhi government and the police machinery to comply with the ban on polluting vehicles entering Delhi. They will be answerable to the court for not maintaining vigil at these 100 entry points,” Justice Oka observed.
Amicus curiae, senior advocate Aparijita Singh, and senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for petitioners, jointly submitted that 50 per cent of the local pollution was caused by vehicles, especially trucks entering Delhi.
The court formed a team of 13 young advocates to act as Court Commissioners to visit the border entry points on November 23 and report back on the GRAP-IV compliance levels at these border points. Justice Oka, speaking for the Bench comprising Justice Augustine George Masih, said its decision to bring down the restrictions to GRAP-II stage would depend on what these Commissioners had to say in their report.
The court ordered the police and the government to set up check-points and deploy personnel, armed with a list of essential commodities permitted under GRAP-IV, at all border points with immediate effect. The Bench ordered the CCTV footage at 13 major entry points, available since November 18, to be handed over to the amicus curiae.
Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for CAQM, urged the court to lower the bar to GRAP-II. “Yesterday and today, we entered the GRAP-II stage. But since the court is intervening, we have not eased GRAP-IV… We are below 400 [Air Quality Index],” she said.
Senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy said she represented a group of daily wagers with special children. She said these parents were forced to stay home due to the closure of schools. “Online classes do not work for these children,” she said.
Bhati agreed the restrictions under the emergency GRAP-IV stage were “very disruptive”.
The court acknowledged that GRAP-IV measures were indeed “drastic”. “It may affect various sections of the society very badly. We will see on Monday,” Justice Oka said.
Stubble burning
The court further directed CAQM to place on record on November 25 the minutes of its meetings and respond to allegations raised by petitioners that it did not disclose that farmers were “aware” of the passing NASA satellite overhead and had timed burning the stubble in their fields accordingly. The petitioners asked why the CAQM had remained mum about the increase in the area that was burnt.
“Farmers were aware of when exactly the satellite would do its overpass. They were informed. This issue was known and discussed in the CAQM meetings. Yet, contrary information was placed before this court in seven affidavits filed by the CAQM… These are the people we are trusting,” Sankaranaryanan submitted to the court.
Bhati agreed to place the minutes while submitting that a protocol for ‘burnt areas’ assessment’ had already been developed by the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) and was under test.
Bhati conveyed the ISRO’s view that data from geostationary satellites “may not be accurate”. In the previous hearing, the petitioners had said feed from a South Korean geostationary satellite showed considerably more instances of crop-burning than the NASA satellite.