Stubble burning: SC faults Centre, Punjab, Haryana; reminds them of citizens’ right to clean environment

As air quality continues to deteriorate in Delhi-NCR due to stubble burning, the Supreme Court on Wednesday faulted the Centre and the governments of Punjab and Haryana for inaction and reminded them of citizens’ right to clean environment.

“Time has come for us to remind the government of India and state governments that there is a fundamental right vesting in every citizen under Article 21 of the constitution of India to live in a pollution-free environment. These are not the matters only of implementing the existing laws. These are the matters of violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India,” a three-judge Bench led by Justice AS Oka said.

“It is not only a question of implementing the orders of the Commission (of Air Quality Management in NCR) and taking action for breaches of law, the government should have to address the question how they are going to protect the right of citizens to live with dignity and in a pollution free environment. Therefore, it is high time that the governments and all authorities note that this litigation is not an adversarial litigation and this litigation is only to ensure that laws related to the environment are strictly complied with so that constitutional rights of the citizens are upheld,” it said.

The Bench – which also included Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Augustine George Masih—pulled up the governments of Punjab and Haryana not prosecuting all errant farmers and letting them off with small fines. As the Centre said Section 15 of the Environmental Protection Act, 1986 which provides for penalty has been amended, the Bench said the Act has become ‘toothless’.

”What action has been taken by you under Section 14 against erring officials? We will take the Union of India to task as they submit that Section 15 which provides for penalty has been amended. You don’t have the adjudicating officer to enforce it. The Environmental Protection Act, 1986 has been made toothless,” it said.

As the Bench criticised both the states for being selective in registering cases and collecting compensation from violators for causing farm fires leading to air pollution, Punjab Advocate General Gurminder Singh said penalizing and punishing farmers wasn’t the ultimate solution to the problem.

Haryana Senior Additional Advocate General Lokesh Sinhal submitted the state was giving incentives to farmers to persuade them for crop diversification and use of machinery to check stubble burning and air pollution.

Asking the Centre to consider amending the law to increase the environment compensation cess levied on farmers who indulged in stubble burning and officials who failed to act, the Centre posted the matter for hearing after Diwali break.

In terms of the previous order, the chief secretaries of Punjab and Haryana were present in court to explain “inaction” on the part of the two states. Haryana Chief Secretary said this year instances of stubble burning had been reduced considerably. But the Bench was not impressed by their submissions.

The top court rapped the Punjab Government for collecting nominal fines of Rs 2,500 each from errant farmers, saying it amounted to giving a licence to violate. “That’s incredible! We will tell you very frankly that you are giving a signal to violators that nothing will be done against them. This has been for the past three years,” Justice Oka said.

Singh said 1,510 farm fires were reported till October 21 this year; 1,084 FIRs were filed and Rs. 12.60 lakh fine was imposed on 473 violators and an amount of Rs 11 lakh was recovered.

“As far as Haryana is concerned, there are 419 cases identified. First information Report have been lodged only against 32 of the wrongdoers, and only in case of 320 wrongdoers, nominal compensation has been recovered,” it noted.

The Bench sought to know why such a large number of violators were not proceeded against.

“We find that both the state governments are picking and choosing while collecting compensation. Therefore, unless there is proper exercise of power under section 15 of the Act, there cannot be any effective action against the farmers,” it noted.

Maintaining that Punjab was committed to the cause of reducing and finally eradicating stubble burning, Singh submitted that the problem needed to be examined at a more humane level.

Though imposition of fine and registration of FIRs acted as a deterrent, it was not a long-term solution which could only be achieved by encouraging and incentivizing the farmers to shun stubble burning.

He said the state’s proposal regarding sanction of funds for crop residue management incentive was not accepted by the Centre and a fresh proposal for release of funds had been sent on October 19.

“We direct the government of India to immediately look into a proposal submitted by the state of Punjab for release of additional funds so that provision for making available tractors, drivers, diesel can be made to those farmers whose holding is less than 10 hectares. We direct the government of India to take an appropriate decision on the proposal submitted by the state government within two weeks from today,” it ordered. The top court also sought to highlight that coordination between the Commission and the authorities of the state was absolutely necessary.