Page 1

1

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

I.A. Nos.366, 367, 368, 370, 371, 372 in I.A.No.365 in I.A.No.345,  I.A.No.369, 373, 374 in I.A. No.366 in I.A. No.365 in I.A. No.345  in Writ Petition(Civil) No.13029/1985

WITH Writ Petition (Civil) No.817 of 2015 WITH Writ Petition (Civil) No.116 of 2013 AND Writ Petition (Civil) No.728 of 2015

M.C.MEHTA                                       Petitioner                      VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                           Respondents     O R D E R

We had by our order dated 9th October, 2015 issued certain  directions, aimed at mitigating the hardship which the people  living in Delhi undergo having regard to the high of pollution  in the city that has earned to it the dubious reputation of  being the most polluted city in the world. We had among others  directed the following measures to be taken:

(1) The Governments of the States of Uttar Pradesh, Haryana  and  Rajasthan  shall  take  steps  to  ensure  that  commercial  traffic  for  destinations  other  than  Delhi  use  alternative  routes and to ensure that in the course of implementation of  the said direction no traffic jams and other inconvenience is

Page 2

2

caused to the public.

(2) The  Government  of  NCT  of  Delhi  shall  direct  issue  advertisements  to  inform  commercial  traffic  of  the  bypass  routes and the imposition of the ECC imposed by this Court for  entry of the vehicles into Delhi.

(3) The toll collectors shall put in place Radio Frequency  Identification (RFID) systems at their own costs at nine main  entry  points  in  the  city  by  November  30,  2015  and  by  31st  January, 2016 at all the remaining 118 entry points to the  city.  The NCT Government shall install its own CCTV cameras at  nine entry points and also organise surprise visits to oversee  the collection of ECC and other necessary arrangements.  

We had by the same order directed levy and collection of  ECC at the following rates:  

(i) The Category 2 (light duty vehicles etc.) and Category 3  (2 axle trucks) at the rate of Rs.700/- per vehicle;

(ii)   Category 4 (3 axle trucks) and Category 5 (4 axle trucks  and above) at the rate of Rs.1300/- per truck.

Passenger  vehicles,  ambulances  and  vehicles  carrying  essential  commodities  like  food  stuffs  and  oil  tankers  for  Delhi were exempted from the above charges.

Mr. Harish N. Salve, learned senior counsel appearing as  amicus, argued that imposition of ECC and the directions issued  by this Court regarding diversion of commercial vehicles/trucks  to  alternative  routes  has  made  some  difference  but  the  pollution levels continue to remain high despite such measures.  He submitted by reference to the material placed on record that  the level of pollution detected on or before 9th October, 2015

Page 3

3

was infact lower than the levels recorded on subsequent dates.  Mr. Salve further submitted that although diversion of vehicles  to alternative routes in terms of the order passed by this  Court was given effect to belatedly on 6th November, 2015, yet  the said direction has not been effectively enforced inasmuch  as vehicles not bound for Delhi are being allowed to enter  Delhi on payment of the prescribed ECC.  It was submitted that  the true spirit of the order passed by this Court was that  vehicles that were bound for Delhi alone were to enter Delhi  and  other  vehicles  bound  for  other  destinations/cities  were  supposed to bypass Delhi by using alternative routes.  He drew  our attention to a similar direction issued by this Court in  M.C. Mehta v.  Union of India and Others – (2003) 10 SCC 561.  It was in that view urged that the order passed by this Court  on  9th October,  2015  could  be  modified/clarified  to  make  it  clear that the State Governments shall take steps to divert  vehicles  that  are  not  bound  for  Delhi  through  alternative  routes especially those using National Highway-8 and National  Highway-1  for  entering  the  national  capital.  It  was  also  contended by Mr. Salve that in order to effectively discourage  vehicles from entering Delhi, the ECC could be revised upwards  especially when the Government of NCT of Delhi, the M.C.D. and  the Union of India were all agreeable to the same.   

Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Solicitor General appearing for  the Union of India, submitted that diversion of traffic away  from Delhi by  use of alternative routes as also by way of

Page 4

4

enhancement of the ECC has been thoroughly discussed with the  learned Amicus Curiae and that the Union of India and so also  the Government of NCT have no objection to such a direction  being issued. He submitted that as a matter of fact discussions  held  between  the  representatives  of  the  two  governments,  namely, Union of India and Government of NCT of Delhi as also  the M.C.D. had led to a consensus on five other points also on  which this Court could issue suitable directions to help reduce  the  pollution  levels  in  Delhi.   It  was  submitted  that  the  revision  of  ECC  could  be  upto  100%  of  the  amount  already  stipulated  for  vehicles  that  are  Delhi  bound  while  other  vehicles which are not bound for Delhi could be directed to  bypass  Delhi  by  using  alternative  routes  which  the  two  governments could be directed to specify.   

By our order dated 6th December, 2001 passed in M.C. Mehta  v. Union of India and Others – (2003) 10 SCC 561, we had, inter  alia, directed :

“8. It appears that vehicles which transit through  Delhi do not adhere to the vehicular standards which  are applicable in Delhi, namely, they are not Euro  II-compliant nor are they using low sulphur and low  benzene  fuel.   There  is  no  reason  why  very  large  number of goods vehicles should transit through Delhi  thereby adding to the pollution level and the traffic  on the road.

9. It is, therefore, proposed that with effect from  15.1.2002 no heavy-, medium- or light-goods vehicles  will  ply  on  inter-State  routes  by  passing  through  Delhi or New Delhi.  It is only those goods vehicles  which on payment of octroi/toll tax carry goods to or  from  Delhi  which  would  be  allowed  to  ply.   The  Commissioner  of  Police  is  directed  to  formulate  a

Page 5

5

scheme in this behalf and give due publicity to all  concerned and implement the same.”

Our order dated 9th October, 2015 was in the same spirit  intended to act as a restraint against vehicles not bound for  Delhi entering Delhi.  The said direction appears to have been  understood to mean as though vehicles not bound for Delhi could  also enter Delhi provided they pay ECC.  The true intention,  however, was that the vehicles that are not bound for Delhi are  diverted to alternative routes to bypass Delhi. The levy of ECC  has no doubt  resulted in some diversion of such vehicles but a  very large number of vehicles not bound for Delhi still appear  to be entering Delhi on payment of ECC, stipulated by us.  In  the circumstances, we consider it necessary to make it clear  that no vehicle which is not bound for Delhi will be allowed to  enter from N.H.-8 which connects Jaipur to Delhi and N.H.-1  that connects the States of Punjab, Haryana and other northern  States  to  Delhi  via Kundli  border.   We  are  limiting  the  restraint  order  to  these  two  entry  points  for  the  present  because from the figures given to us the largest number of  vehicles that are entering into Delhi are from these two entry  points.  We according direct that traffic from these two entry  points viz. Kundli border on N.H.-1 and Rajokri on N.H.-8,  shall  be  diverted  to  bypass  Delhi  through  such  alternative  routes as the transport/traffic departments of the governments  concerned may stipulate.   

We are further of the view that empty/unladen vehicles

Page 6

6

bound for Delhi, can enter Delhi on payment of the ECC earlier  stipulated by us @ Rs.700/- and Rs.1300/- per vehicle depending  upon the category to which the vehicle belongs. We, however,  direct that for Delhi bound vehicles loaded with goods, the ECC  will be twice the charge stipulated by us by our order dated 9th  

October, 2015.  This measure shall, in our opinion, discourage  any vehicle trying to enter Delhi on a false pretext of the  goods loaded on it being Delhi bound.

Mr.  Salve  next  argued  that  the  transport  vehicles  registered on or before 2005 which are non-compliant with the  current pollution control standards also need to be disallowed  from entering Delhi even if the same are Delhi bound with goods  loaded for consumption in the city. There was a consensus among  learned  counsel  for  the  parties  even  on  this  issue  who  submitted that Union of India or Government of NCT of Delhi  have no real objection if a direction to that effect is issued.  We accordingly direct that while vehicles “bound for Delhi” may  enter on payment of ECC at the rates stipulated hereinabove,  those registered in the year 2005 or earlier shall not qualify  for  such  entry.   State  Governments  and  Union  Territories  concerned  shall  ensure  that  vehicles  bearing  registration  numbers of the year 2005 or earlier do not enter Delhi.  The  governments will evolve a suitable system for implementation of  this direction.  

It was contended by Mr. Salve that since diesel vehicles  are the most polluting vehicles contributing to the current

Page 7

7

state  of  affairs  in  Delhi,  it  is  time  to  issue  directions  banning registration of any new private and/commercial light  duty diesel vehicles in the National Capital Region.  This  submission was opposed by Mr. Ranjit Kumar who submitted that  banning of commercial light duty diesel vehicles is likely to  affect trade and commerce within Delhi and supply of essential  commodities to the people living in the National Capital Region  especially because such vehicles are used in large numbers for  ferrying goods from one place to the other in the region.  

M/s. Dushyant Dave and Dhruv Mehta, learned senior counsel  appearing for the automobile dealers selling diesel vehicles,  also opposed any ban on registration of new private vehicles  and commercial light duty diesel vehicles as proposed by Mr.  Salve.  Having  given  our  anxious  consideration  to  the  submissions made at the Bar, we are of the view that the new  commercial  light  duty  diesel  vehicles  can  for  the  present  continue being registered in Delhi on account of the dependence  of the public on such vehicles for supply of essentials.  There  is, however, no reason why registration of private cars and  SUVs using diesel with an engine capacity of 2000 cc and above  should not be banned upto 31st March, 2016.  It is noteworthy  that  diesel  vehicles  of  2000  cc  and  above  and  SUVs  are  generally used by more affluent sections of our society and  because of the higher engine capacity are more prone to cause  higher levels of pollution.  A ban on registration of such  vehicles  will  not  therefore  affect  the  common  man  or  the

Page 8

8

average citizen in the city of Delhi. We accordingly direct  that Registration of SUVs and private cars of the capacity of  2000 CC and above using diesel as fuel shall stand banned in  the NCR upto 31st March, 2016.   

It was then argued by Mr. Salve that all taxis including  aggregators like OLA and UBER plying in the National Capital  Region may be moved to C.N.G. fuel within a reasonable time but  not later than 1st March, 2016. There was a general consensus on  this  subject  also  primarily  because  it  is  hoped  by  all  concerned  that  it  will  contribute  substantially  to  the  reduction  of  the  pollution.  We,  therefore,  direct  that  all  taxis including those operating under aggregators like OLA and  UBER in the NCT of Delhi, plying under city permits shall move  to C.N.G. not later than 1st March, 2016.   

It was submitted by Mr. Salve that one of the contributors  to the pollution in the city is dust that rises from the roads  and pavements which are not fully developed.  It was submitted  that Government of NCT of Delhi could be directed to vacuum  clean the roads which will substantially reduce the pollution  levels.  To the credit of learned counsel for the Government of  NCT of Delhi and Union of India and  the M.C.D. we must mention  that a direction to that effect was not opposed by anyone of  them. As a matter of fact, Mr. Wasim A Qadri, learned counsel  for the Government of NCT of Delhi submitted that the State  Government is very keen to undertake these steps to reduce the  pollution levels and ensure that paving of roadsides starts

Page 9

9

immediately. Vacuum cleaning will, however, take some time as  the State Government shall have to purchase vacuum cleaning  vehicles/appliances for use on the roads.   

We accordingly direct the Government of NCT of Delhi to  take immediate steps for repair of pavements and make pavements  wherever the same are missing and also to take immediate steps  for procurement of the requisite vacuum cleaning vehicles for  use on Delhi roads expeditiously but not later than 1st April,  2016.   

It was argued by learned counsel for the parties that one  of the major contributors to the current pollution levels is  the construction activities going on in the National Capital  Region.  It  was  submitted  that  Union  of  India  and  State  Governments concerned must be directed to take steps to enforce  the C.P.C.B. rules and norms against those engaged in such  construction activities to prevent further rise of pollution  levels. We see no reason to decline a direction to that effect.  C.P.C.B.  norms  regarding  prevention  of  pollution  by  putting  curtains  and  other  devices  at  construction  sites  must  be  strictly  enforced  by  the  enforcement  agencies  concerned.  We  direct accordingly.

It is also contended by learned counsel for the parties  that one of the contributors to the pollution is burning of  solid  waste  by  local  bodies  like  M.C.D.,  N.D.M.C  and  institutions that generate such waste. It was submitted that

Page 10

10

burning of solid waste was impermissible under the relevant  rules and that lapses on the part of the concerned authorities  in the matter of enforcing the said rules is contributing to  the  deteriorating  situation.  It  was,  therefore,  prayed  that  authorities including the local bodies and institutions within  the  National  Capital  Region  be  directed  to  refrain  from  disposing of solid waste by burning such waste and to take  steps  for  proper  management/disposal  of  such  waste  in  a  scientific manner following the norms and the requirements of  the relevant rules in that regard.  We see no reason to decline  that  prayer  either.  We  accordingly  direct  that  the  State  Government  and  the  local  bodies  concerned  including  M.C.D.,  N.D.M.C. and all other institutions that are generating solid  waste shall take steps to ensure that no part of such waste is  burnt and that proper arrangements are made for disposal of  such waste in a scientific way without causing any hazard to  environment.   

There are a few other suggestions also mooted by learned  counsel for NCT of Delhi with which we are not dealing at  present as learned counsel for Union of India and the amicus  curiae wanted some time to examine the same and make their  submission.  They may do so on or before the next date of  hearing.   

Mr. Shyam Divan, learned counsel for the toll collector- SMYR Consortium LLP, prayed for early hearing of his (I.A.  No.366) for modification of our Order dated 9th October, 2015 as

Page 11

11

according to the learned counsel, the diversion of vehicular  traffic away from Delhi is seriously impacting the contract  entered into by the applicant with M.C.D.  

In the circumstances, therefore, while we adjourn these  proceedings to  Tuesday, the 5th January, 2016 to be listed  along with all pending applications including those filed by  the toll collector, we direct that steps that we have indicated  hereinabove  shall  be  taken  by  all  concerned  in  the  right  earnest notwithstanding any order to the contrary passed by any  court or authority or Tribunal whatsoever.

Post on 5th January, 2016.

...................CJI. (T.S. THAKUR)

.....................J. (A.K. SIKRI)

.....................J. (R. BANUMATHI)

NEW DELHI DATED 16th DECEMBER, 2015.