REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA  CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 13029 OF 1985   

M. C. MEHTA …PETITIONER(S)

Versus

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.          …RESPONDENT(S)

(IN RE : RECOMMENDATION NOS. 2.2.1 AND 2.2.2 OF REPORT NOS. 71 AND 78 SUBMITTED BY EPCA)

J U D G M E N T

Deepak Gupta, J.

1. The seminal issue to be decided is whether Bharat Stage IV

(for  short BS­IV) compliant vehicles should be permitted to be

sold in India after 31.03.2020.

2. In  an earlier judgment  dated  13.04.2017,  we  have  given

detailed reasons for the  order  dated  29.03.2017  whereby this

Court had directed that on and from 01.04.2017, vehicles which

1

are not BS­IV compliant, shall not be sold by any manufacturer

or dealer or motor vehicle company whether such vehicle is a two

wheeler, three wheeler, four wheeler or commercial vehicle etc..

We had also by the said order prohibited registration of non­ BS­

IV vehicles from 01.04.2017 except if such vehicles were sold on

or before 31.03.2017.   Since in the judgment dated 13.04.2017,

we have set out in detail the history leading to implementation of

the Bharat Stage compliant fuels, it is not necessary to repeat the

same here.   However, a short recap of the same would be

apposite to understand the issues in hand.

3. In 2003, the Government of India announced the National

Auto Policy based on the recommendations of the  Mashelkar

Committee constituted in 2001.   BS­IV compliant vehicles were

made compulsory for four wheelers in different parts of the

country on different dates starting from 01.04.2005, from which

date registration of only BS­IV compliant vehicles were permitted

in the metropolises of  Delhi,  Ahmedabad, Bengaluru, Mumbai,

Pune and Kolkata.   Thereafter, it was made compulsory to have

BS­IV compliant vehicles in some other cities from 01.04.2010.

More cities were added on 21.05.2010 and on 14.07.2015.

2

Finally, by amendment dated 19.08.2015 it was mandated that

BS­IV norms would come into force throughout the country w.e.f.

01.04.2017.   

4. As far as two and three wheelers are concerned, they were

made subject to BS­III norms on and with effect from 01.04.2010

by  insertion of sub­rule  16 in  Rule  115 of the  Central  Motor

Vehicle Rules, 1989 hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’.   With

effect from 04.07.2014, it was mandated that on and from

01.04.2016 all two wheeler vehicles will comply with BS­IV

emission norms and all existing models will shift to BS­IV

emission norms from 01.04.2017.   Similarly, Rule 17 was

inserted in Rule 115 of the Rules on 12.06.2015 in respect of

three wheelers wherein BS­IV standard would be applicable to

new  models on or after 01.04.2016.   Resultantly, only those

vehicles which were BS­IV compliant would be sold after

01.04.2017.

5. An issue was raised by the manufacturers of motor vehicles

that they should be given reasonable and sufficient time for sale

of stocks of those vehicles which are not BS­IV compliant vehicles

3

but manufactured up to 31.03.2017.   This Court did not accept

the submission of the manufacturers and  issued the direction

referred to  hereinabove.   It  would  be interesting to  note that

though some of the  manufacturers  of two wheelers  and  three

wheelers took a stand before this Court that great technological

changes are required to make the vehicles BS­IV compliant, one

of the largest manufacturers of two wheelers and three wheelers

in India i.e. Bajaj Auto, filed an application in this Court praying

that it was already manufacturing BS­IV compliant vehicles and

that the vehicles not complying to BS­IV norms should not be

registered after 2017.

6. The issue before us is somewhat similar.  Mr. Ranjit Kumar,

learned senior counsel and Mr. Sandeep Narain, learned counsel

appearing for the Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers (for

short ‘SIAM’), have submitted that though they are not averse to

manufacturing BS­VI  compliant vehicles, they should be given

some  time to sell the stocks of  non­BS­VI compliant vehicles

manufactured upto 31.03.2020.  In this regard, they have made

reference to the notification dated 20.02.2018 whereby sub­rule

4

21 has been inserted in Rule 115 of the Rules, which reads as

follows:

“In the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, in rule 115, after sub­rule (20), the following sub­rule shall be inserted namely:­

“(21) New motor vehicles conforming to Emission Standard Bharat Stage­IV, manufactured before the 1st

April, 2020 shall not be registered after the 30th June, 2020:

Provided that the new motor vehicles of categories M and N conforming to Emission Standard Bharat Stage­ IV, manufactured before the 1st April, 2020 and sold in the form of drive away chassis, shall not be registered after the 30th September, 2020.”

7. It is submitted that the Government of India while balancing

the need for a cleaner environment with the practical difficulties

faced by the manufacturers has given a three months’ window to

the automobile manufacturers to dispose of the vehicles

conforming to BS­IV norms.   In respect of certain categories of

commercial vehicles in which only a chassis is sold and a body

has to be built thereupon, the period of  registration has been

extended up to 30.09.2020.

8. It has been contended on behalf of SIAM that in Europe the

normal  practice is that  about  one  year’s time is given to the

5

manufacturers of vehicles when a higher quality of fuel is

introduced and the fuel is introduced much earlier and thereafter

an outer limit is fixed for sale of compliant vehicles.  According to

SIAM, BS­VI fuel will be available in the entire country only with

effect from 01.04.2020 and manufacturers are, therefore, forced

to stop production after 31.03.2020.  Therefore, it is not feasible

for the manufacturers to switch over to BS­VI compliant vehicles

overnight.  They have to be given some reasonable time for sale of

the accumulated stocks of non­BS­VI (i.e. BS­IV) compliant

vehicles.  It is further submitted that six to nine months’ time is

required to shift the assembly line to  make  BS­VI compliant

vehicles and if the request of the manufacturers is not accepted,

they will have to start manufacturing BS­VI compliant vehicles

well before 31.03.2020 and at least three to six months’ prior to

the said date.  It has also been contended that earlier BS­VI fuel

was to be introduced with effect from 01.04.2024, which was pre­

poned to 01.04.2023  and it was then pre­poned to 01.04.2021

and finally the date was advanced to 01.04.2020.  It was decided

to leapfrog from BS­IV fuel to BS­VI fuel without shifting to BS­V

fuel.   According to SIAM, this is creating a lot of difficulties for

the manufacturers.   

6

9. Mr. Gopal Subaramaniam, learned senior counsel appearing

for one of the manufacturers, submits that his clients are already

manufacturing vehicles  which are both  BS­IV and  BS­VI fuel

compliant and they are on the road already.   Mr. A.N.S.

Nadkarni, learned Additional Solicitor General submits that

keeping in view the difficulties faced by the manufacturers and

balancing the need to have a cleaner environment, three months’

period given to the manufacturers is reasonable.   He also urges

that the Rules have not been challenged by any party and,

therefore, this Court should not go into the validity of the Rules.   

10. On  the  other  hand,  Ms.  Aparajita  Singh, learned amicus

curiae, has made a passionate plea that no non­BS­VI compliant

vehicle should be permitted to be sold in the entire country after

01.04.2020.   She has drawn our attention to the Report of the

Parliamentary Standing  Committee (for short ‘the  Committee’)

dated 07.08.2018.   This Report mainly deals with National

Capital Region (NCR) of Delhi but there are some references to

the entire country.   Some of the observations  made by the

Committee need to be considered and taken note of.   The

7

Committee in Para 5.15 notes that the problem of air pollution is

affecting all human beings and any leniency on the part of the

Government in tackling it  will  have  a  cascading  effect on  the

health of the citizens.   These observations have been made with

specific reference to vehicular pollution and the need to ensure

compliance of BS­VI norms with effect from 01.04.2020.   There

can be no two views that air pollution is hazardous to health.  We

may, also take note of certain observations of the Report of the

Committee which show that one out of three children in Delhi

suffers from respiratory problems.   This is almost twice as high

as compared to the city of Kolkata or rural areas.  We may note

that the World Health Organisation’s (WHO)  database  of  more

than  4,300 cities showed Indian cities of  Gwalior, Allahabad,

Raipur, Delhi, Ludhiana, Khanna, Varanasi and Patna as being

among the most polluted in the world1.   Our attention has been

drawn to various other documents which clearly show the

deleterious effects of pollution on health.     The hazards of

pollution and its ill effect on the health of the citizens especially

children are not limited to the city of Delhi or the NCR of Delhi

but affect all the citizens of the country.

1 “World’s Most Polluted Cities”, World Economic Forum, 03.05.2018

8

11. The Union Government has spent about Rs.30,000 crores to

manufacture BS­IV compliant fuel.  We have been informed that

another Rs. 30,000/­ crores of the taxpayers’ money have been

expended by the Union to ensure that the fuel available in the

country  is  BS­VI  compliant.   It is  heartening  to note that the

Union, being concerned with the health of the citizens and also

taking note of the urgent need for a clean environment, has taken

steps to manufacture cleaner fuel.   This fuel has already been

made available in the National Capital Territory  (NCT) of Delhi

from 01.04.2018 and we have been informed that barring a few

places, it shall be available in the entire NCR from 01.04.2019.  It

will probably be available in many parts of the country prior to

01.04.2020 and the entire country will shift to BS­VI fuel from

01.04.2020.   Obviously, the manufacture of clean fuel is being

done in a phased  manner because all the refineries cannot

simultaneously start manufacturing clean fuel.  It is not as if on

01.04.2020 just by waving a magic wand the entire country will

change to BS­VI compliant norms.   If all the refineries and

manufacturers by taking note of the requirement to bring in BS­

9

VI fuel, have introduced such fuel from 2018 and are introducing

it in a phased manner in the entire country by 31.03.2020, we

see no reason why manufacturers of automobiles, two wheelers,

three wheelers etc. cannot also do so.

12. We may note  that  whereas  in this  Court  SIAM has been

canvassing that the shift to BS­VI compliant vehicles is a long

drawn out  process requiring  huge  changes in technology, the

very same manufacturers are selling and exporting BS­VI

compliant vehicles to Europe and other countries.  With regard to

two wheelers it has been specifically urged that the technological

changes  are immense.  To counter this  argument the learned

amicus curiae has drawn our attention to a Press Release issued

by  M/s. Hero  MotoCorp., which is one of the largest  motor

manufacturers  of two  wheelers in the  country.   In this  Press

Release issued in July 2017 it has been stated that M/s. Hero

MotoCorp. has begun developing BS­VI compliant models and it

aims  to introduce  such  products  much before the timeline  of

2020.  The company has also stated that it will manufacture only

BS­VI fuel compliant vehicles well before the date stipulated by

10

the  authorities.   If one  manufacturer can  do this,  we see  no

reason why other manufacturers of two wheelers cannot do so.   

13. With regard to trucks and buses, from a news item

published in the Financial Express dated 06.07.2018, it is

apparent that Eicher is already manufacturing trucks and buses

which are not only BS­VI compliant but BS­VI CNG compliant.

Another manufacturer of heavy vehicles i.e. Ashok Leyland had,

in August, 2018 through its subsidiary Optare obtained an order

to  manufacture the  world’s first electric  double  decker  buses.

The technology  needed to  manufacture such  electric  buses is

much more advanced and difficult as compared to the

technological changes required to manufacture petrol and diesel

vehicles which are BS­VI compliant.   Similarly, TVS Motors on

07.08.2018 has issued a press note that it will be manufacturing

BS­VI compliant vehicles much ahead of the deadline of 2020.

Many members of SIAM in the Auto Expo held in February, 2018

have exhibited vehicles  which are technologically  much  more

advanced than BS­VI compliant vehicles.   These manufacturers

have not only asserted that they can manufacture electric

11

vehicles but also asserted that they are developing hydrogen cell

fuel vehicles along with hybrid, electric and CNG vehicles.   

14. We have mentioned these facts only to highlight that some

of the manufacturers are not willing to comply with the

31.03.2020 deadline not because they do not have the technology

but because the use of technology will lead to increase in the cost

of the vehicles which  may lead to reduction in sales of the

vehicles and ultimately their profit.  There can be no compromise

with the health of the citizens and if one has to choose between

health and wealth, keeping in view the expanded scope of Article

21  of the  Constitution,  health  of the teeming  millions of this

country  will  have to take  precedence  over the  greed  of  a few

automobile manufacturers.  The automobile manufacturers must

behave responsibly.  We expected that keeping in view our earlier

order, they would have themselves volunteered to be BS­VI

compliant by 31.03.2020.   Unfortunately, this has not been the

case with some of the manufacturers and they want to stretch on

the timeline by a few days or months for no other reason but to

make a little more money.   

12

15. When we compare  BS­VI fuel  with BS­IV  fuel, there  is  a

massive improvement in environmental terms.   Once BS­VI

emission norms are enforced, there will be a 68% improvement in

PM2.5.  This is not a small change.  It is a vast improvement and

the faster it is brought, the better it is.   The amicus curiae has

strenuously urged that, at least, in the NCR of Delhi, the BS­VI

norms be applied for sale of vehicles from 01.04.2020.   We feel

that it may not be practical to introduce BS­VI compliant vehicles

region­wise or city­wise.   In our view, the BS­IV experiment in

this regard was not very successful.  BS­VI compliant vehicles are

going to be more expensive than BS­IV compliant vehicles.

People  have a  tendency to buy cheaper  vehicle(s)  even  from a

neighbouring city.  We  also strongly feel that the  problem of

pollution is not limited to the NCR of Delhi but it is a problem

which has engulfed the entire country especially the major cities.

India has the dubious distinction of having 15 out of the 20 most

polluted cities in the world.   The pollution in Gwalior, Raipur &

Allahabad is worse than Delhi.  The situation is alarming and

critical.  It brooks no delay.

13

16. It is an established principle of law that the right to life, as

envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution of India includes

the right to a decent environment2. It includes within its ambit

the right of a citizen to live in a clean environment3.   With regard

to vehicular traffic, this Court has issued a number of directions

to ensure a clean environment and reduce pollution4. It has been

held that the right to clean environment is a fundamental right5.

The right to live in an environment free from smoke and pollution

follows from  the “quality”  of life  which is  an inherent  part  of

Article  21  of the  Constitution.  The right to live  with  human

dignity becomes illusory in the absence of a healthy

environment6.  The right to life not only means leading a life with

dignity but includes within its ambit the right to lead a healthy,

robust life in a clean atmosphere free from pollution.  Obviously,

such rights are not absolute and have to co­exist with 2 Shantistar Builders v. Narayan Khimalal Totame AIR 1990 SC 630;(1990) 1 SCC 520.   3 Bhavani River ­ Sakthi Sugars Ltd., In re, (1998) 2 SCC 601

4 M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, (1998) 6 SCC 60, M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, (1998) 6 SCC 63, M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Matter regarding emmission standard for vehicles), (1999) 6 SCC 12, M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, (2002) 10 SCC 191, M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, 2017 SCC Online SC 394

5 N.D. Jayal v. Union of India, (2004) 9 SCC 362.

6 Shantistar Builders vs Narayan Khimalal Gotame & Ors. Etc,   AIR 1990 SC 630,  M.C. Mehta v. Union of India,(2004) 12 SCC 118,   State of M.P. v. Kedia Leather & Liquor Ltd., (2003) 7 SCC 389.  

14

sustainable development.  Therefore, if there is a conflict between

health and wealth, obviously, health will have to be given

precedence.   When we are concerned with the health of not one

citizen but the entire citizenry including the future citizens of the

country, the larger  public interest  has to outweigh the  much

smaller pecuniary interest of the industry, in this case the

automobile  industry, especially when the entire wherewithal to

introduce the cleaner technology exists.

17. It is therefore necessary to ensure that BS­VI compliance is

uniform throughout the country so that even those areas of the

country which fortunately have not suffered the ills of extreme

pollution are safe  in  the  future.  The sale of  automobiles  and

other vehicles is rising exponentially and the number of vehicles

on the road is increasing day by day.   Therefore, even a day’s

delay in enforcing BS­VI norms is going to harm the health of the

people.  We are dealing here with a situation where children and

unborn children suffer from pollution and issues of inter­

generational equity are involved.   Do we as a society or as

manufacturers of automobiles have a right to manufacture more

polluting vehicles when we have the technology to manufacture

15

less polluting vehicles?  The answer is obviously a big NO.  If we

were to factor only economics even then it makes no economic

sense to have more polluting vehicles on the roads.  The effect of

pollution on the environment and health is so huge that it cannot

be compensated in the marginal extra profits that the

manufacturers might make.  The amount spent on countering

the ills of pollution such as polluted air, damaged lungs and the

cost of healthcare far outweigh the profits earned.   

18. It was urged on behalf of the manufacturers that there are

multiple sources of pollution and vehicles only contribute to 2%

of the pollution.   We are not in agreement with this submission

because the Report of the Committee to which we have adverted

hereinabove states that contribution of vehicles to ambient PM2.5

concentration during winter season is 25% and in the summer

season it contributes 9%.   Even if we were to accept the figures

submitted by SIAM, we are of the view that no step is too small

when it comes to fighting pollution.   Small steps to reduce

pollution when taken together will lead to large scale reduction in

pollution which will result in much cleaner air, which eventually

16

will result in a cleaner and better environment, healthier citizens

and most importantly a  healthier generation to come.   

19. In view of the fact that these proceedings have been pending

in court  for a long time and also in view of the fact that it is

because of orders of this Court that BS­IV and now BS­VI norms

have been introduced from the dates which were not even

thought of by the Government, we feel that we have to take suo

moto  notice  of the  Rules.  At the  outset,  we may notice that

sub­rule 21 of Rule 115 is very vague.  It does not talk of sale of

vehicles.   It  only mentions registration of vehicles and permits

registration of vehicles conforming to BS­IV norms up to

30.06.2020 and in case of categories M & N, up to 30.09.2020.

This rule, in our view, is violative of Article 21 of the Constitution

in as much as it extends time for registration of vehicles beyond

31.03.2020 and must be accordingly read down.  Any extension

of time  in  introducing  the new norms which  is not  absolutely

necessary  adversely impacts the  health  of the  citizens and  is,

therefore, violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.   This

Rule goes against the spirit of all the orders passed earlier by this

Court.   In  the month of  March,  2017 we were dealing with a

17

situation when BS­VI norms were to be made effective

throughout the country  with effect from  01.04.2020 and this

Court had directed that non­ BS­IV compliant vehicles shall not

be registered on or after 01.04.2017.  The situation in the present

case is totally different.   31.03.2020 is almost 1 ½ years away.

There is sufficient time for the manufacturers to change over to

the new system and, therefore, we see no reason why they should

be given a window of three or six months for sale of accumulated

vehicles.  Every vehicle sold after the cut­off date of 01.04.2020 is

bound to cause more pollution and, therefore, the

manufacturers,  in our considered view, cannot be permitted to

sell any non­BS­VI compliant vehicle on or after 01.04.2020.  On

the one hand, the Government has been pro­active in spending

huge amounts of money to move to the BS­VI technology, but on

the  other  hand, the  automobile industry is  coming up with a

variety of untenable excuses just to delay the introduction of BS­

VI compliant vehicles by a  few months.   We,  in our  judgment

dated 13.04.2017, had clearly held “when the health of millions

of our countrymen is involved, notification relating to commercial

activities ought not to be interpreted in a literal manner.”   We

have to give a purposive interpretation to notifications specially

18

those dealing with public health issues and even more so, when

health not only of the citizens at present but also the citizens in

the future is involved.  There is more than sufficient time for the

manufacturers to manufacture BS­VI compliant vehicles.   They

already have the technology to do so.   The automobile industry

must show the will, responsibility and urgency in this regard.

20. The Government has developed a policy of phasing out

polluting vehicles and discouraging the manufacturers of

polluting  vehicles.  This  has  been done  in a  gradual  manner.

Europe  introduced Euro­IV  fuel in the year 2009 and Euro­VI

standards in 2015.  We are already many years behind them.  We

cannot afford to fall back further even by a single day.  The need

of the hour is to move to a cleaner fuel as early as possible.   

21. Therefore, in exercise of the power vested in this  Court

under Article 142 of the Constitution, we read down sub­rule 21

of  Rule  115 and direct that  sub­rule  21 of  Rule  115 shall  be

interpreted and understood to read that no motor vehicle

conforming to the emission standard Bharat  Stage­IV shall  be

19

sold or registered in the entire country with effect from

01.04.2020.       

….……………………..J. (MADAN B. LOKUR)

…………………………J. (S. ABDUL NAZEER)

.….…………………….J. (DEEPAK GUPTA)

New Delhi October 24, 2018

20