Context :
Frame policy to phase out heavy diesel vehicles,
says SC
·
Hindustan
Times (Noida)
·
12 Jan 2024
·
Utkarsh
Anand letters@hindustantimes.com
The
Supreme Court on Thursday directed the Centre to frame a national policy to phase out heavy-duty diesel vehicles like
trucks and trailers,
and replace them with BS-VI vehicles that use cleaner fuel, underlining people living in all parts of the country and not only those living in
the Delhi-ncr are entitled to breathe clean air and a pollution-free
environment.
Deciding
to monitor the government’s steps regarding the proposed policy, a bench of
justices AS Oka and Pankaj Mithal remained emphatic that air pollution directly affects the
fundamental rights of all
the citizens,
guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, and that the enforcement of this right is not confined to the people living in Delhi-ncr.
“The
right to life guaranteed under Article 21 includes the right to live in a
pollution-free environment. The issue of air pollution is of a great deal of
importance to every citizen. Air pollution affects
citizens’ quality of life,” held the bench, fixing the next hearing on July 31
for reporting of the compliance by the Union ministry of transport and
highways.
It
further said that the process of exploring the possibility of finding better
sources, including CNG/ hybrid/electric, for use of heavy-duty vehicles ought
to continue.
“We propose to grant the ministry of road
transport and highways six months to come out with a policy on the replacement of
heavy-duty diesel vehicles with BS-VI vehicles. While we do so, we make it
clear that with ever-advancing
technology, constant endeavour
to explore the availability of other fuel resources that could be used for
heavy-duty vehicles should always continue,” stated the court.
The
court was dealing with a petition relating to the pollution caused by an Inland
Container Depot (ICD) in Delhi due to a huge inflow of
trucks and trailers that were not even destined for the national
capital. ICDS are temporary storage facilities for import and export-related
goods.
By
an order in March 2019, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) directed the
Container Corporation of India (CONCOR) to ensure that, in a phased manner, diesel vehicles stop visiting the ICD at Delhi and shift to
electric, hybrid or CNG vehicles. The tribunal also proposed an alternative
that the diesel vehicles meant to park at the Delhi ICD may be diverted to ICDS
in nearby states.
This,
the top court on Thursday, found unacceptable, noting the NGT’S opinion connoted as if
only the people living in the Delhi-ncr alone are entitled to pollution free
atmosphere and not those living in other parts of the country.
“Such
an observation by the NGT is in complete ignorance of the fact that citizens living in other parts of the country, other than Delhi-ncr,
also have a fundamental right to a pollution-free environment as
guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India,” it said.
The
bench added that the NGT, in its endeavour to safeguard the fundamental right
of the people of Delhi-ncr, cannot allow infringement of the
same fundamental right of the citizens living elsewhere. “The observation of the NGT is totally
unjustified and unwarranted,”
it maintained.
The
Supreme Court, in a public interest litigation instituted by environmentalist
MC Mehta in 1984, has been monitoring the steps taken by various authorities to
curb air pollution in Delhincr in what has become an annual public health
crisis when the region remains in the grip of hazardous pollution for almost
two months starting November.
In
its judgment on Thursday, the court further directed CONCOR to
formulate a plan for the optimal utilisation of the inland container depots
garlanding Delhi within six months, besides coordinating with all the official
agencies to enable the setting up of central laboratories near ICDS around
Delhi-ncr, so that so that the infrastructure in other ICDS around Delhi does not
remain under-utilised by exporters and importers.
Article Name:Frame policy to phase
out heavy diesel vehicles, says SC
Publication:Hindustan Times (Noida)
Author:Utkarsh Anand
letters@hindustantimes.com
My
Take :
Dear Justices AS
Oka and Pankaj Mithal
:
Many thanks for taking cognizance of my following 9 YEAR old e-mail :
Second
Class Citizens ? …………………….. 07 Jan 2015
Extract :
If you live in
any city other than Delhi , you are a second class citizen !
At least ,
the Supreme Court of India seems to think so !
What else
can explain its deep concern for the health of Delhi-ites , while choosing to
overlook the fact that Diesel Vehicle Pollution is
equally damaging the lungs of the lesser beings, living in dozens of other
cities ?
Or does SC
think that pollution related situation in these other cities has yet not
reached a level of alarm ?
Or
that time is not yet " ripe " for it to concern itself with future of
the children of people living in these other cities ?
Is it possible that SC is waiting for
some citizens of these lesser cities to file a PIL ?
May be SC thinks its "Judicial Activism"
does not legitimately extend beyond the NCR ?
I fondly
believe ( even now ) that for the Common
Man of this country , SC is the only real " Maa - Baap
" which steps in whenever the Government Officers / MLAs / MPs , fail to
take timely decisions to protect the health of its Citizens ,
everywhere
I still
very much believe that SC has , time and again , proved that it is the Court of Last Resort
I hope SC
has read in papers ,the figures of AQI ( Air Quality Index ) in other cities
In any
case , I hope that , on its own , SC will take SUO
MOTO cognizance of this blog and treat it as a PIL to enlarge its recent orders
to cover the rest of India !
A WORD
OF CAUTION :
If Hon Judges of the Supreme Court were to read the rest of my blogs at ,
www.hemenparekh.in ,
they may take SUO MOTO cognizance of many and keep aside PILs from Prashant Bhushan / Subramanian Swami !
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hemen
parekh
07 Jan 2015
=====================================
Supreme Court has granted
your ministry, 6 months to come up with a POLICY “ on
the replacement of heavy-duty diesel vehicles with BS-VI vehicles.
“
But , this time around ,
SC had the foresight to add :
“While we do so, we make it clear that
with ever-advancing
technology, constant endeavor to explore the availability of other fuel resources that could be used for
heavy-duty vehicles should always continue,”
Here is your chance to “ Surprise the Supreme “
By filing an AFFIDAVIT
which says :
“ Dear Hon Supreme Court :
Many thanks for suggesting
that my Ministry explore the use of ADVANCING TECHNOLOGY , for finding a
PERMANENT solution to the air pollution caused by , not only the DIESEL
vehicles but for ALL vehicles
Not only for citizen of
Delhi but for ALL the citizen of India , living anywhere
To announce such a POLICY in
6 months
We do not need 6 months . In
6 weeks , we will submit a clear ROAD-MAP for “ Air Pollution Solution “ based on
the Framework suggested in :
Transport : an
Integrated Logistic Plan ?.. ……………………….. 20 Nov 2018 “
With Regards,
Hemen Parekh
www.HemenParekh.ai / 12
Jan 2024
Comments by BARD :
I've read your blog and I think your suggestion for a TRANS-TAX on all vehicles based on
their HARM QUOTIENT is an interesting and
potentially effective way to incentivize the adoption of less-polluting
vehicles. Here are some of my thoughts:
Strengths
of your suggestion:
·
Targeted
approach:
By basing the tax on the HARM QUOTIENT, you can directly target the
vehicles that have the greatest negative impact on the environment. This is a more efficient approach than simply raising taxes
on all vehicles, as it would encourage people to
switch to cleaner alternatives.
·
Flexibility
and adaptability:
The HARM QUOTIENT can be adjusted to take into
account new technologies and emissions standards, ensuring that the
tax remains effective over time. This is important, as the automotive industry
is constantly evolving.
·
Revenue
generation:
The tax could generate significant revenue that could be used to
fund environmental initiatives, such as public transportation
or clean energy projects. This could help to offset the costs of air pollution
and climate change.
Challenges
to consider:
·
Complexity:
Determining the HARM QUOTIENT of each vehicle would be a complex
process, requiring data on emissions, fuel efficiency, and other factors. This
could be expensive and time-consuming to implement.
·
Equity
concerns:
Some people may argue that the tax would unfairly burden low-income
drivers who cannot afford to purchase newer, less-polluting vehicles. This
could be mitigated by implementing
exemptions or subsidies for low-income drivers.
·
Political
feasibility:
Implementing a new tax is always politically difficult. It is important to build public support for the TRANS-TAX before attempting
to implement it.
Overall, I think your suggestion
has merit and deserves further consideration.
It
is a creative and potentially effective way to address the problem of air
pollution. However, it is important to
carefully consider the challenges and potential drawbacks before implementing
such a tax.
Here are some additional thoughts on
your letter to the Supreme Court:
· I commend
you for taking the initiative to write
to the Supreme Court and bring this issue to their
attention. It is important for citizens to engage with the government and advocate for policies that will improve the environment.
· I agree
that the Supreme Court should take a broader view of the air pollution problem
and not just focus on Delhi. All citizens have the right to
breathe clean air, regardless of where they live.
· I
think your suggestion for a ROAD-MAP for "Air Pollution Solution" based on the framework in your
previous blog is a good one. This would show the
Supreme Court that you have a well-developed plan
and are serious about addressing this issue.