Delhi Pollution: Supreme Court pulls up AAP government for not allocating funds for Rapid Rail; orders transfer of ad budget

The Supreme Court on Tuesday pulled up the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP)-led government in Delhi for failing to provide funds for the Regional Rapid Transport System (RRTS) projects in the Alwar and Panipat corridors, despite a recent undertaking to do so in July this year. .A bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia proceeded to order a transfer of funds meant for advertising by the government to these RRTS projects. However, the order was stayed for a week, leaving some time for the AAP government to make good on its earlier promise.."The advertising funds for the last three years had been called for. It was ₹1,100 crores for the last 3 years and ₹ 550 crores for this year. We would have been inclined to transfer those funds. However on last date, Dr. Singhvi had assured that the funds would be made available. We are thus constrained to direct that the funds allocated for advertising be allocated for this project. At the request of the Delhi government counsel, however, we keep this order in abeyance for one week. If the funds are not transferred the order will come into effect," the Court ordered. .The bench was hearing a case dealing with the deteriorating air quality in Delhi and stubble burning in nearby States, which is said to be one of the biggest contributors to air pollution.Among the issues that were taken up today was the delay in implementing RRTS projects, which is touted to be a more eco-friendly mode of transportation. "We will (have to) stay and attach your advertising budget (if you do not give funds for the RRTS project)", the Court warned the Delhi government before passing its order.The Court added that the matter would be listed after a week to see what has been done."If this is only way that States will co-operate, then we have to do this. You didn't even seek an extension. You cannot take court for granted," the bench further observed.Earlier, on July 24, the Court had sounded a warning over the Delhi government's delay in contributing its share of funds when it came to the implementation of the Delhi-Meerut RRTS, which has since been inaugurated. This was one of the three rapid rail corridors planned under Phase I of the RapidX project. .[Delhi-Meerut rapid rail] If ₹1,100 crore can be spent on ads in 3 years, then State can finance infra projects too: Supreme Court.Before passing today's order, the Court noted that it had also ordered the government to provide funds remaining for these projects on July 24. .Other issues taken up todayThe other issues taken up today by the top court included measures to tackle stubble burning and to curb the burning of garbage in open areas.The Court was told by the Advocate General of Punjab that 984 first information reports (FIRs) have been lodged in connection with stubble burning.However, Attorney General R Venkataramani pointed out that fines have been imposed only in 6,000 of the 20,000 incidents of crop fires. "We have a huge gap in imposing fines and incidents of crop fires. Out of 20,000 odd, only 6,000 fined," he said.The Court recorded the same in its order. "Out of the total fires reported in Punjab, after field visits it appears only in 20% of cases fines have been imposed," the order noted.The Court also remarked that farmers with small holdings are more likely to resort to burning."What I understand is people who have sufficient holdings have enough incentive to monetize it through mechanised (harvesting). But those with small holdings are struggling (and may have to resort to stubble burning)," the bench said.The Court acknowledged that there were obstacles to small farmers adopting alternative ways of disposing of stubble, including the costs involved. To address this, the Court suggested that the government could supply funds, which could later be recovered from by products that arise from alternative disposal methods. "They are doing it in Punjab. They are getting free electricity also," a counsel told the Court. Senior Advocate Vikas Singh pointed out that 100 percent subsidies would have to be provided to fund such ventures in Punjab, prompting the Court to point out that the Central government may say it cannot give such incentives only to Punjab."See, bottom line is Centre and States must keep aside their politics in this," the Court eventually urged.The Court also reiterated earlier concerns that the practice of relying on paddy cultivation should be phased out in Punjab. The bench noted that land is slowly becoming arid due to paddy cultivation and farmers must be made aware about such effects, the bench added. "The long term effects of growing paddy in such a manner could be disastrous. We hope it is dealt with," the Court proceeded to record in its order. .As far as the pollution in Delhi and outlying areas were concerned, the Court was told that the burning of waste continues to take place out in the open both in Delhi and Uttar Pradesh. "Whether it is being burnt 1 km here or there it is still happening. Delhi will say it is in UP and UP will say Delhi etc. We have flagged all," the Court observed before directing the authorities to file reports on such incidents before adjourning the case till December 7..Earlier this month, the Court had strongly suggested that the practice of stubble burning should be stopped, adding that schemes like odd-even days for vehicles to combat air pollution are mere optics.It had also suggested that paddy cultivation should be phased out of Punjab, and directed that non-Delhi registered taxis be barred from entering the national capital.More recently, the Court had observed that registering criminal cases against farmers who burn paddy stubble is not a solution to tackle the ensuing air pollution. Instead, the government should consider withholding minimum support prices (MSP) to such farmers for their crops, it was suggested. The Court, however, clarified later that it was not advocating for a total removal of MSP on paddy. All the same, it added that farmers are a part of society and they have to be responsible as well.