Blitz Bureau
NEW DELHI:The Supreme Court has expressed serious concern over the “endless litigation” continuing under the long‑running environmental cases titled MC Mehta vs Union of India, which involve monitoring issues of air pollution in Delhi and the environment of the Taj Trapezium Zone.
A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant on February 23 remarked that the continued filing of interlocutory applications (IAs) and miscellaneous applications (MAs) was creating an incorrect impression that cases decided long ago were still pending.
Taking note of the large number of pending applications, the Bench, also comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M. Pancholi, observed, “What is happening in this court? IA after IA is being filed in this court. MC Mehta alone has 85 pending ones. Then you will ask Parliament how many cases are pending before us. We will not go through such embarrassment.”
It added that several matters originally instituted in 1984 and 1985 had been decided decades ago, yet continued filings have kept them reflected as pending proceedings. “It appears that there are multiple matters which are shown pending as MC Mehta v. UoI. There is one of 1984 — decided decades ago — yet miscellaneous applications are being filed and listed as if the 1984 petition is still pending. Another matter of 1985 too was decided, but due to IAs and MAs, it is shown as alive,” the apex court noted in its order.
The Bench directed that three major MC Mehta matters, including the Taj Trapezium case, be listed on separate dates, with all pending IAs to be tagged and heard independently on the respective dates fixed.
It further asked court officials and counsel appearing in the matters to assist in recaptioning the cases so that disposed-of petitions are not treated as continuing litigation. “We want identification of matters so that old cases are not kept alive merely because applications are filed. The exercise should also identify cases that can appropriately be transferred to jurisdictional High Courts,” the court said, directing that no further IAs would be entertained in the 1985 matter. In a related development, the Bench took note of submissions made by Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati on behalf of the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) regarding long‑term measures to tackle the air quality crisis in Delhi-NCR.
