Delhi Air Pollution Crisis | Can’t hold us to standards of developed countries, Union argues; SC asks for long term plan

Today, the Supreme Court pressed the Union Government, Punjab and Haryana to come back within a day with a workable, long-term solution to Delhi’s pollution emergency. The direction followed submissions that satellite data is undercounting farm fires and that the causes of stubble burning have remained unresolved for over a decade.

The Bench of Chief Justice B.R. Gavai, Justices K.V. Chandran and N.V. Anjaria made clear that short-term bans and seasonal restrictions cannot address the pollution situation in the capital.

On 15 October, the Court allowed the limited sale and use of green firecrackers across the NCR for a four-day window during Diwali. The Bench directed strict monitoring of air quality, enforcement and compliance to prevent violations

Singh: ‘Farmers have no time; crop burning is employed to conserve groundwater’

Senior Advocate Aparajita Singh, appearing as amicus curiae, told the Court that the present stubble-burning schedules cannot be understood without first recognising that Punjab’s paddy sowing was deliberately delayed from 2009 to conserve groundwater. “Because the paddy is delayed, the harvesting of paddy and then planting of wheat are compressed… farmers don’t have enough time. The easiest thing to do is to burn,” she submitted.

Singh emphasised that this burning is not out of negligence but compulsion. She recalled that it was at the Court’s intervention that specialised machinery, balers, Happy Seeders and Super Seeders had been heavily subsidised. “50 percent for individual farmers, 80 percent for cooperatives. Thousands of machines have been provided every year since 2018.”

She said Punjab’s new plea seeking ₹100 per quintal compensation from the Centre was a “repetitive” proposal that recurs annually despite huge public spending. “Why have they not been able to solve it? Asking for ₹100 per quintal is one solution, but not the solution,” she told the Bench.

Singh alerted the Bench to the fact that official stubble-burning numbers are incomplete. Referencing India Today, The Hindu and posts by NASA scientist Hiren Jetwa, she said farmers have been told the timing of satellite passes so they can burn after the satellite crosses. “Actual burning is being undercounted,” she stressed, adding that the CAQM’s own report confirms that current methods “do not capture all the burning.”

Bhati: ‘There are constraints in a developing country, can’t expect measures taken by developed countries’

ASG Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for the Union, acknowledged the limitations of current detection systems. “We do notice gaps… we have developed a protocol with ISRO and are working on two additional protocols to calculate burnt area,” she said, clarifying that these remain in trial phases.

Bhati submitted that Punjab’s present application was “nothing new,” pointing out that the Centre had already disbursed ₹1,963 crores to the State for crop-residue machinery. She added that machinery distribution is monitored by CAQM, with state governments involved at every step.

According to Bhati, Delhi’s overall pollution load is driven by its geographic position as well as human-generated emissions and stubble burning. She urged the Court to recognise the constraints of a developing country and added, “When you compare a developed country with developing countries, the same measures cannot apply. We are Global South; our realities have to be seen.”

Responding to concerns over AQI equipment, Bhati said the monitors used are “one of the best in the world”. The amicus, however, countered that some stations cap at 999 AQI, and sought an affidavit. Bhati explained that sprinkling of water around stations was part of GRAP-III requirements, including mandatory anti-smog guns for high-rise buildings.

Sankaranarayanan: ‘We are in an emergency unlike anything seen; PM2.5 damage is irreversible’

Appearing for an intervenor, Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan stated that  “nothing like this has ever been seen before… we are in an emergency situation,”.  He recalled that Delhi’s air improvements in the early 2000s were achieved only because past Benches took uncompromising measures, such as mandatory CNG conversion and removal of highly polluting industries.

Sankaranarayanan described the Punjab and Haryana paddy-sowing laws of 2009–10 as the root cause of the compressed crop cycle. The real solution, he argued, lay in advancing paddy sowing by at least two months, as practised in California and Beijing. He submitted, “Burning cannot be ended; it happens in farm systems globally. What matters is when the burning happens…it must not happen when the winds flow to Delhi.”

He added that geostationary satellite data shows farm-fire numbers have not actually fallen, and emissions in 2022, 2023 and 2024 have increased. “The numbers remain the same… the emissions remain the same,” he submitted.

Sankaranarayanan criticised India’s AQI thresholds. “When WHO says 50 is dangerous, our triggers are set far higher. PM2.5 is irreversible. Once it goes into my child’s lungs, it will never leave.” When CJI Gavai asked whether he expected everything to be stalled year-round, Sankaranarayanan replied, “It has to be stalled. Three out of ten deaths in Delhi are singularly caused by air pollution.”

From the Bench 

The Court said that Delhi’s pollution cannot be handled through short-term or seasonal responses—the problem now requires a long-term plan. CJI Gavai noted that the city’s air quality has continued to deteriorate despite repeated restrictions every winter and remarked that “a long-term solution needs to be worked out”. When Sankaranarayanan urged a year-round halt on several activities, the Bench said this was not practical. “We cannot only think about one side… a large population depends on these activities,” CJI Gavai noted, adding that a blanket stop on construction was not possible.

The Court also directed the Chief Secretaries of Punjab and Haryana to ensure full implementation of the CAQM’s directions on stubble burning. The Bench noted that while recorded incidents may have reduced, the pollution levels have not. The Union Government was asked to place on record a concrete long-term proposal, after Singh and Bhati both stated that temporary measures were not sufficient. On the concern raised by the amicus regarding AQI monitors capping at 999 and the possibility that satellite systems were not capturing all fires, the Bench asked the Union to file an affidavit explaining the monitoring equipment in use and its accuracy.

The Court gave the authorities a day to respond and listed the matter for further hearing on 19 November.