The Supreme Court on Friday ordered stricter implementation of anti-pollution measures while questioning various authorities over gaps in enforcement and discrepancies in data regarding stubble burning.

As Delhi’s air quality index (AQI) briefly improved below 400 this week – it was back to 401 by 6pm on Friday – the court will consider on Monday whether to reduce restrictions as part of the graduated response action plan (Grap). . Meanwhile, he ordered increased surveillance of vehicles entering Delhi.

A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Augustine George Masih noted the “apparent failure” of the Delhi Police and the state government to enforce key provisions of the GRAP Phase 4 restrictions, which came into force on November 18.

Under Phase 4, which represents the highest level of pollution control measures, all trucks except those carrying essential items are banned from entering Delhi. Exceptions are made for trucks carrying essential perishable goods, petroleum products and other critical items as well as those which are electric or comply with the latest BS-VI exhaust emission norms.

The court designed a new monitoring mechanism by appointing 13 young lawyers as court commissioners – one for each major entry point to Delhi – to collect photographic and video evidence of compliance with the ban on entry of heavy trucks and light utility vehicles (LCV). They will submit their reports on November 25.

“On Monday, we will consider the issue of continuation of GRAP 4 and the report of the commissioners as well as other issues regarding the continuation of GRAP 4,” the bench said.

The court expressed concern over the lack of surveillance at entry points to Delhi. While senior advocate Shadan Farasat, appearing for the Delhi government, said trucks were being monitored and checked at the borders, he admitted that CCTV coverage existed at only 13 major entry points, with little supervision at the remaining 100 points.

“It is difficult for us to assume that the entry of trucks is blocked. People manning checkpoints don’t know which vehicles to stop. All this is done in an arbitrary manner, which makes the restrictions meaningless,” the bench observed.

The court ordered the immediate establishment of checkpoints at all 113 entry points, with clear guidelines for staff on exempted categories such as essential goods and services. She also sought CCTV footage of the 13 monitored points ahead of Monday’s hearing.

The court expressed serious concerns over discrepancies in stubble burning data after amicus curiae Aparajita Singh highlighted government figures showing “total areas burned” much larger than fire incidents reported might suggest.

Singh cited a report showing that the burned area of ​​Punjab increased from 15.1 lakh hectares to 19.1 lakh hectares, while that of Haryana increased from 21 lakh hectares to 24 lakh hectares. This is in stark contrast to official data reporting just 1,084 fires in Punjab and 419 in Haryana between September and October 21.

“We need an explanation on this because these are government figures. There is something more, because the total area burned is totally different from the number of fires,” the court noted.

The discussion of discrepancies follows earlier concerns about farmers who might schedule stubble burning to avoid detection by NASA satellites that pass between 10 a.m. and 1:30 p.m.

Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, representing the Centre, defended the monitoring system, saying geostationary satellites were less reliable due to their lower resolution. She informed that the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) had asked ISRO to develop new protocols to study burnt areas.

Senior lawyers Gopal Sankaranarayanan and Singh suggested establishing oversight of the CAQM through a committee comprising former Supreme Court judges experienced in pollution cases. Although the court did not favor the creation of another expert commission, it was open to the inclusion of such individuals within the CAQM.

The bench will consider reducing GRAP 4 restrictions on Monday, after considering reports from court commissioners. It also agreed to look into concerns raised by parents, through senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy, regarding the impact of school closures on disadvantaged students and children with special needs.

The case arose from a public interest litigation brought by environmental activist MC Mehta. The court plans to separately examine various pollution factors in the coming weeks, with full hearings likely in January, subject to the chief justice’s approval.