The Supreme Court has ordered continuous hearings in the Delhi-NCR air pollution case and pulled up authorities for delays and lack of clarity on pollution sources. CJI Surya Kant directed CAQM to bring experts together and submit a consolidated report within two weeks.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday heard a long-pending public interest litigation concerning the worsening air pollution levels in Delhi and the National Capital Region (NCR). The matter arose in a landmark environmental case filed by noted environmentalist M.C. Mehta, through which the Court has been monitoring air quality issues for several decades.
The case was heard by a Bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant along with Justice Joymalya Bagchi.
During the proceedings, the Chief Justice made it clear that identifying the exact causes of air pollution is the core issue before the Court and expressed concern over the lack of clarity despite extensive expert inputs available in the public domain.
The Chief Justice observed,
“Have you been able to identify the causes? That is the central issue. Over the past few days, a lot of material has come into the public domain experts are writing articles, people are expressing views, and many are emailing the Court.”
Highlighting one of the major contributors to pollution, the Chief Justice pointed to vehicular emissions and unchecked construction activity in the NCR. He stated,
“Heavy vehicles seem to be contributing significantly, so the first question is how that will be addressed. Also, there is worrying news from the NCR housing and construction activities continue despite the situation.”
The Court expressed its dissatisfaction with the approach adopted by authorities, particularly with delays in decision-making. The Chief Justice remarked,
“Merely holding a meeting on 2 January and then stating that you will come back after two months is not acceptable to the Court.”
Responding to this, the Additional Solicitor General submitted,
“We intended to bring all stakeholders on board.”
The amicus curiae then referred to various studies on pollution sources and submitted,
“There are several reports indicating that vehicular pollution accounts for around 20%.”
However, the Chief Justice disagreed with this assessment and clarified,
“Vehicular pollution contributes about 40%. I am referring to another report.”
The ASG thereafter referred to technical studies and stated,
“Refers to IIT reports on source apportionment.”
The Court noted inconsistencies in expert findings, with the Chief Justice observing,
“Even expert institutions are giving differing views.”
In response, the ASG assured the Court,
“IIT has been requested to carry out further work.”
The Chief Justice then suggested better coordination among expert bodies and asked,
“Why don’t you bring them under one umbrella and have them deliberate together?”
The ASG replied,
“We have developed a framework, and as soon as Your Lordships are ready, we will place it on record. When Your Lordships take up the matter issue-wise, we will file our status reports.”
Taking a firm stand on delays, the Chief Justice made it clear that the matter would not be adjourned repeatedly. He stated,
“We are not going to adjourn the matter beyond two weeks. It has to be heard on a continuous basis. As noted in the 17 December order, we do not seek credit for innovating ideas. If applications or letters are being filed, the expert bodies themselves should indicate the issues that need to be addressed. We do not understand why they require directions from the Court to do so.”
The Court further highlighted the lack of consensus among experts on pollution sources. The Chief Justice observed,
“Domain experts such as IITs have identified various emission sectors, but there is wide divergence among expert bodies on their proportional contribution to the worsening AQI in the NCR. For instance, the transport and emission sector has been assessed anywhere between 12% and 41% by different experts. Despite measures taken from time to time, the AQI problem in the NCR remains persistent, if not aggravated.”
Recalling previous judicial directions, the Chief Justice stated,
“The Court has been dealing with the issue intermittently, seeking inputs from experts and the amicus at various stages. In this backdrop, and noting the deteriorating AQI conditions, the statutory expert body CAQM was directed, by the order dated 17 December 2025 (para 6), to revisit long term measures. That order also flagged additional issues, including the temporary suspension of nine MCD toll plazas, as suggested by NHAI. However, the MCD, instead of proposing solutions, has filed an affidavit justifying the toll plazas as a source of revenue.”
The Court also took note of demands raised by local authorities and observed,
“The Gurgaon Metro Development Authority has also sought directions for apportionment of 50% of the ECC collected in Gurgaon.”
Criticising the approach of the Commission for Air Quality Management, the Chief Justice said that CAQM had failed to show urgency. He noted that CAQM had filed only a status note without offering concrete solutions and added that this left the Court with no choice but to step in.
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant remarked that cars have turned into a status symbol, with people now saving money to purchase four-wheelers instead of using bicycles.
The CJI made this observation while hearing a petition concerning air pollution in the Delhi-NCR region.
During the hearing, senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi suggested that limiting the number of cars people own could help tackle air pollution.
Responding to this, CJI Kant said,
“Car has become a status symbol… People are saving money to buy cars and have stopped using cycles.”
The Chief Justice then recorded the suggestions placed by the amicus on various sectors. He said that on vehicular pollution, proposals include reducing the number of vehicles, imposing higher Environmental Compensation Charges, strengthening enforcement through tools such as ALPR and regulating parking, and moving towards cleaner alternatives. He further noted that coordination among agencies and stricter enforcement mechanisms were also suggested.
Addressing other pollution sources, the Chief Justice stated,
“It has also been suggested that power plants strictly comply with prescribed environmental standards.”
He further added,
“With respect to industrial pollution, measures like transition to cleaner fuels have been proposed.”
The Court also noted concerns relating to shifting deadlines by power plants and the impact of construction and road dust. The Chief Justice observed,
“It has also been suggested that power plants should not keep shifting the goalposts, and the report further flags the impact of construction activity and road dust on air quality.”
Emphasising the statutory responsibility of CAQM, he said that expert institutions must be brought together and a broad consensus must be reached without delay. He also noted that public awareness could help citizens adopt corrective measures once causes are clearly identified.
The Chief Justice further clarified that while electric vehicles are important, the Court does not favour blanket directions without assessing financial implications. He said that a calibrated long-term action plan is necessary and warned that delays would only worsen the problem.
Concluding the hearing, the Court passed clear directions and stated,
“The Court accordingly directs CAQM to convene a meeting of domain experts within two weeks. Based on the deliberations, a consolidated report shall be prepared and placed in the public domain, and the entire exercise must be completed before the next date of hearing. CAQM shall also independently examine and formulate its position on the issue of toll plazas, uninfluenced by the stands taken by different stakeholders.”
The matter will now be heard again after the submission of the consolidated report, with the Supreme Court making it clear that continuous monitoring and timely action are essential to address Delhi-NCR’s worsening air quality crisis.
Case Title:
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India
(W.P. (C) No. 13029 of 1985)
Read Live Coverage:
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Delhi-NCR Air Pollution
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
