Delhi Government Seeks Supreme Court Review on Vehicle Age Ban
Delhi's Appeal to the Supreme Court
The Delhi government, led by the Bharatiya Janata Party, has approached the Supreme Court to reconsider its 2018 ruling that imposed a comprehensive ban on petrol vehicles older than 15 years and diesel vehicles older than 10 years in the National Capital Region.
In its petition, the government contended that the assessment of a vehicle's road-worthiness should be based on actual emissions, as measured by scientific methods, rather than a blanket age restriction.
According to the government, the rationale for age-based limitations is no longer valid.
A bench headed by Chief Justice BR Gavai is scheduled to hear the case on Monday.
While the ban was intended to improve air quality, it has resulted in significant challenges for Delhi residents. The government noted that advancements in vehicle technology and stricter enforcement of pollution control measures now seem to outweigh the benefits of maintaining the ban.
Furthermore, the government highlighted that the introduction of Bharat Stage VI engines and the implementation of Pollution Under Control standards effectively address the environmental concerns that led to the original court decision.
It also urged the Union Government or the Commission for Air Quality Management to conduct a comprehensive scientific study to evaluate the effectiveness of the age-based ban.
The government pointed out that vehicular emissions are just one of many contributors to Delhi's air quality issues, with other significant sources including stubble burning, construction dust, industrial emissions, and weather patterns.
On July 1, the Commission for Air Quality Management mandated fuel stations to cease supplying petrol or diesel to vehicles deemed 'end-of-life.' However, this order has been postponed until November 1 due to technological challenges and concerns regarding cross-border fueling.
The decision to delay enforcement followed the Delhi government's expression of concerns about public inconvenience and implementation difficulties. Initially, the government supported the measure, but public opposition prompted a reevaluation.