Advocate Mandeep Singh Vinaik, representing the petitioners, had previously argued that the PIL focused on a localized issue, whereas the Supreme Court was not addressing the matter in such specific terms.'

 

“What really is happening is a crisis of such proportions that it puts nuclear disasters to shame. I am consciously aware that the larger issue may be dealt with by apex court, but this is a very specific petition with a specific and narrow scope. Hence, my humble request to this Court to deal with this matter on this limited scope,” Vinaik said.

 

However, Additional Solicitor General Satyapal Jain and Additional Advocate General of Haryana Deepak Balyan informed the court that the issue is already pending before the Supreme Court in the MC Mehta case, which is scheduled for hearing on Thursday.

 

When the petitioners’ counsel insisted for issuance of notice on the PIL, the Court said,

“Why should there be a difference of opinion? There can be a difference of opinion between two courts, that should be avoided.”

The Court then disposed of the PIL, granting the petitioners the liberty to approach the Supreme Court in the ongoing matter.

The PIL was filed by Arun Duggal, Rajiv Kumar Vij, and Rajan Mehta, who argued that stubble burning in Punjab and Haryana significantly contributes to the deteriorating air quality in the region and neighboring states.

Notably, the Supreme Court, while hearing the air pollution case in Delhi, had strongly condemned the instances of stubble burning in Punjab and Haryana. In October, it summoned the Chief Secretaries of both states after expressing severe disapproval over the inadequate legal action against stubble burning.

On November 28, the apex court reaffirmed its commitment to hearing the air pollution case in detail, with the aim of finding a long-term solution to the crisis.