TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court directs financial support and machinery to stop stubble burning, warns against rice cultivation's water impact</h1> <h3>M.C. MEHTA Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.</h3> The SC addressed stubble burning by farmers and directed implementation of financial and machinery support to prevent the practice. The court noted that ... Burning of paddy crop by the SHOs - implementation of financial and machinery support for farmers to prevent stubble burning - HELD THAT:- There are farmers operating at larger economic scales where they are able to gain even a profit out of this byproduct by use of these machines. The Committee must look into the aspect of discouraging cultivation of rice especially on account of the water required for it and the wells running dry in Punjab. The long term impact could be disastrous. Thus, persons concerned must put their head together to see how to encourage the switch over to alternative crops. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDEREDThe Court considered several core issues in this judgment:The effectiveness of measures taken by the State of Punjab and Haryana to control stubble burning and the associated environmental impact.The implementation of financial and machinery support for farmers to prevent stubble burning.The issue of e-waste burning in Delhi/NCR and the actions required by the states to address it.The non-implementation of the Colour Coded Stickers scheme for vehicles and the need for compliance.The financial obligations of the Delhi Government towards the Regional Rapid Transport System project and the reallocation of funds from advertisement budgets to this project.ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS1. Control of Stubble Burning in Punjab and HaryanaLegal Framework and Precedents: The Court examined the enforcement of environmental regulations and the imposition of Environmental Compensation (EC) for stubble burning.Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Court noted the inadequacy in the enforcement measures, highlighting that only a small percentage of inspected fields had EC imposed.Key Evidence and Findings: The Court reviewed data showing the number of fire incidents, fields inspected, and cases where EC was imposed, along with financial allocations for machinery and incentives.Application of Law to Facts: The Court emphasized the need for effective implementation of existing measures and suggested additional financial incentives and machinery support.Treatment of Competing Arguments: The Court considered arguments regarding the financial burden on farmers and the potential for using byproducts to offset costs.Conclusions: The Court urged the State of Punjab to adopt successful strategies from Haryana and explore alternative crops to reduce environmental impact.2. Burning of E-Waste in Delhi/NCRLegal Framework and Precedents: The Court referred to existing environmental regulations prohibiting open burning of waste.Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Court noted ongoing violations despite existing curbs and directed the states to take action.Key Evidence and Findings: The Court acknowledged the persistence of e-waste burning in open areas.Application of Law to Facts: The Court called for reports from the states to ensure compliance with environmental laws.Treatment of Competing Arguments: The Court focused on the need for enforcement rather than addressing competing arguments.Conclusions: The Court expected action from the State of Delhi and Uttar Pradesh and required a follow-up report.3. Implementation of Colour Coded Stickers for VehiclesLegal Framework and Precedents: The Court referred to the legislative mandate for Colour Coded Stickers, effective from April 2019.Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Court observed poor implementation for existing vehicles and called for improved compliance.Key Evidence and Findings: The Court noted that the scheme was implemented for new cars but lagged for existing ones.Application of Law to Facts: The Court directed the Cabinet Secretary's Committee to issue further directions for compliance.Treatment of Competing Arguments: The Court did not delve into competing arguments, focusing on compliance.Conclusions: The Court sought better implementation of the scheme by the states.4. Financial Obligations for Regional Rapid Transport System ProjectLegal Framework and Precedents: The Court reviewed previous orders and assurances regarding the funding of the project.Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The Court expressed concern over the diversion of funds to advertisements instead of the project.Key Evidence and Findings: The Court examined budget allocations and assurances made by the Delhi Government.Application of Law to Facts: The Court directed the reallocation of advertisement funds to the transport project.Treatment of Competing Arguments: The Court considered the importance of the project over other expenditures.Conclusions: The Court ordered the transfer of funds from advertisement budgets to the project, with a compliance deadline.SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGSCore Principles Established: The Court reinforced the importance of effective implementation of environmental measures and compliance with legislative mandates.Final Determinations on Each Issue: The Court directed specific actions and compliance measures for each issue, with follow-up reports and deadlines.Verbatim Quotes of Crucial Legal Reasoning: The Court emphasized the need for states to 'put their head together to see how to encourage the switch over to alternative crops' and highlighted the importance of reallocating funds 'for purposes of funding to the extent that the subsidy has been given.'
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
