The Supreme Court reiterated that children must not be exposed to hazardous air, reaffirming its ban on outdoor sports during peak pollution months. The CJI-led Bench also warned against multiple pleas, stressing clarity, enforceability, and disciplined environmental litigation.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India has addressed the critical issue of air pollution and its impact on children’s health, reiterating that judicial directions must be practical, enforceable, and respected in both letter and spirit. During a recent hearing, the Court examined concerns about children’s safety amid severe air pollution and issued a cautionary message to public interest litigants.
An application seeking urgent directions for the protection of children amid worsening air quality was mentioned before the Court. Counsel submitted that the issue “can be taken up with the main matter, which is already listed for Wednesday.”
However, the Chief Justice of India (CJI)-led Bench cautioned against filing multiple applications, observing that
“when there is already an operative order passed last month, repeated applications only create confusion.”
Recalling its earlier directions, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that outdoor sports and physical activities for children must not take place during November and December, when pollution levels are at their most severe.
Despite this, the Bench was informed that children’s sporting activities continue. Counsel alleged that authorities were “finding ways to bypass the Court’s orders, exposing children to hazardous air.”
The Bench noted that the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) has reiterated through a fresh notification that
“the Supreme Court’s directions clearly prohibit children from playing outdoors during severe pollution conditions.”
Emphasising the need for practical governance, the Supreme Court cautioned against passing orders that cannot be enforced. The Bench observed:
“Directions must be effective and realistic. Orders which are misunderstood or impossible to enforce serve no purpose.”
The Court further noted that several pollution-control measures demand “significant behavioural and lifestyle changes,” which are “particularly difficult to implement in large metropolitan cities.”
The Bench also highlighted the unequal burden of pollution-control measures on economically weaker sections, especially construction workers affected by GRAP-IV restrictions.
The Court observed that such workers “lose their daily wages and face immediate economic hardship,” underlining the need to balance environmental protection with social justice.
Making its position clear, the Supreme Court stated that
“separate arguments or parallel interventions will not be permitted at this stage.”
The Bench emphasised that it alone will determine “what needs to be examined and in what manner.”
In a sharp message to public interest litigants, the Supreme Court cautioned against the misuse of environmental cases for publicity. The Bench warned:
“Environmental matters should not be used for media attention. Judicial time is limited, and cooperation is essential.”
The Court stressed that fragmented litigation only delays meaningful outcomes.
Concluding the hearing, the Supreme Court reiterated that all concerns relating to air pollution and children’s safety must be “routed through the central mechanism already in place.” The Bench signalled a clear preference for structured, focused inputs rather than multiple filings.
READ LIVE COVERAGE
Read More Reports On Delhi Air Pollution