The duty of the Court to protect the right to a clean environment under Article 21 and the preference for alternative fuels such as CNG were the main legal principles established in the judgment.

Headnote:
BEST Buses - Vehicular Pollution Control - Bombay Electric Supply and Transport Under taking - Smoke Affected Residents' Forum v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay - 2002(2) Bom.C.R. (O.O.C.J.)343 - The court discussed the application of directions to control and reduce emissions from motor vehicles, particularly BEST buses, in the city of Mumbai. The court considered the age profile of the buses, the maintenance program of the undertaking, and the report of the Lal Committee. It highlighted the legal principles established in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, emphasizing the duty of the Court to protect the right to a clean environment under Article 21 and the preference for alternative fuels such as CNG.
Fact of the Case:

The case involved a petition filed by the Smoke Affected Residents Forum seeking directions to control and reduce emissions from motor vehicles, specifically BEST buses, in Mumbai. The court analyzed the age profile and maintenance program of the buses, as well as the report of the Lal Committee.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the BEST buses did not comply with emission standards, with 80% of the fleet not meeting even the Euro-I norm. It recognized the maintenance program of the undertaking but emphasized the need for a concrete program to reduce emissions. The court also highlighted the legal principles established in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, emphasizing the duty of the Court to protect the right to a clean environment under Article 21 and the preference for alternative fuels such as CNG.
Issues: The issues included the compliance of BEST buses with emission standards, the adequacy of the maintenance program, and the need for a concrete program to reduce emissions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the BEST undertaking must phase out buses over 15 years old and replace them with Euro II/CNG buses, induct at least 100 CNG buses per year, and retrofit buses with Euro II engines. It emphasized the duty of the Court to protect the right to a clean environment under Article 21 and the preference for alternative fuels such as CNG.
Final Decision: The court directed the BEST undertaking to phase out buses over 15 years old, induct at least 100 CNG buses per year, and retrofit buses with Euro II engines. It also emphasized the duty of the Court to protect the right to a clean environment under Article 21 and the preference for alternative fuels such as CNG.

JUDGMENT - Dr. CHANDRACHUD D.Y. J.:-An aversion for long names is a consequence of the hectic pace of life in Metropolitan Mumbai. Busy thoroughfares named after freedom fighters, public institutions, including in occasion, those rendering judicial functions and train stations, to name a few instances, have popular acronyms. For the resident of the city, the daily routine begins with a journey in a suburban train, traverses the familiar sight of a red public bus with an occasional foray into a taxi cab. Consistent with its penchant for abbreviations, the city labels the Bombay Electric Supply and Transport Under taking as the BEST. The public transport buses which the undertaking plies, single deckers and double deckers, are BEST buses. The subject matter of these proceedings are the BEST buses. In a petition filed in the public interest by the Smoke Affected Residents Forum, directions have been sought from this Court to control and reduce emissions from motor vehicles plying in the city of Mumbai. The petition has been, in the not too distant past, the foundation for judicial orders relating to taxis, transport vehicles and three wheelers. The petitioners seek an extension of the directions to the BEST buses. The undertaking on the other hand urges that no directions are required as its acronym, BEST, can be demonstrated to serve as an adjective as well, at least in matters of environmental pollution.

2. On the invocation of the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the constitution, an Expert Committee was constituted by an order dated 15th December, 1999. The Committee consisted of the Transport Commissioner Mr. V.M. Lal as its chair person, Dr. P.S. Pasricha (who has since been appointed as a Commissioner of Police) and representatives of the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests, the Bombay Environmental Action Group and Clean Air. The terms of reference of the committee included inter alia the use of alternative fuel such a Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) administrative and regulatory measures that would be required for setting up additional stations for dispensing CNG: the desirability and easibility of converting existing buses and taxis to CNG and for phasing out private cars, trucks, buses, taxis, auto-rickshaws and two wheelers over a certain age limit. The Expert Committee appointed by the Court submitted its report in April 2000 whereupon, a Division Bench of this Court consisting of Chief Justice B.P. Singh (as the Learned Chief Justice then was) and Mrs. Justice Ranjana Desai issued directions in an order dated 17th October, 2001. (Smoke Affected Residents' Forum v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay)1, 2002(2) Bom.C.R. (O.O.C.J.)343.

3. The order of the Court contained directions that would apply to taxis, three wheelers and transport vehicles with the exception of BEST buses. Salient among the direction were the following cut off dates by which phasing out orders would come into operation, unless the vehicle was converted to run on CNG/LPG:

*1st March 2002: Phasing out of taxis over the age of 15 years:

*1st January 2003: Phasing out of taxis more than 8 years but less than 15 years old:

*1st March 2002: Phasing out of three wheelers over the age of 10 years:

*1st January 2003: Phasing out of three wheelers above the age of 8 years:

*1st January 2003: Phasing out of transport vehicles over 15 years old:

*1st January 2004: Phasing out of transport vehicles over the age of 8 years with the exception of BEST buses.

4. Some of the deadlines fixed by the Court were extended in the course of implementation in order to obviate hardship. The Division Bench noted the following reasons for excluding BEST buses at that stage from the deadline which had then been prescribed for phasing out transport vehicles:

"With regard to the BEST buses, we consider it in public interest, for the present, not to direct phasing out of the fleet of buses of BEST, though, as a matter of pol

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis

2003 Supreme(Bom) 1430

The duty of the Court to protect the right to a clean environment under Article 21 and the preference for alternative fuels such as CNG were the main legal principles established in the judgment.

Cases Referred (1)

Judicial Analysis