The Supreme Court of India delivered a stern warning to the Delhi government on Tuesday, emphasizing the imperative of full compliance with its commitment to allocate funds for the Regional Rapid Transit System (RRTS) project. Expressing dissatisfaction with the partial disbursement of funds, the court insisted on complete adherence to the government's assurance.

A panel comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia addressed concerns about the deteriorating air quality in the Delhi-National Capital Region (NCR) raised in several petitions. The region typically witnesses a surge in pollution levels during the winter, attributed to factors such as the burning of crop residues in neighboring states.

In July, the Delhi government, in response to a directive to disclose budgetary allocations for government advertisements, committed to allocating funds for the RRTS project. The court, led by Justice Kaul, had pointed out that if substantial funds could be allocated for advertisements, a similar commitment to infrastructure projects like the RRTS should be feasible.

In a previous hearing, the court expressed displeasure with the Delhi government for failing to fulfill its commitment, labeling it a 'gross breach.' The National Capital Region Transport Corporation (NCRTC) had highlighted this breach, leading the court to order the redirection of government advertisement funds for the RRTS project. However, at the Delhi government's request, the court temporarily suspended the order for a week.

In the latest hearing, it was revealed that the Delhi government had disbursed only a fraction of the instructed amount. Senior Advocate ANS Nadkarni argued that the funds had not been transferred, indicating potential non-compliance with the court's directive.

Justice Kaul directed Senior Advocate Meenakshi Arora, representing the Delhi government, to provide evidence of compliance, stating, "Now please show us the document that shows compliance." Despite Arora's claim that Rs 415 crores had been transferred, Nadkarni highlighted that even the order authorizing the release of funds specified 'partial compliance.'

Amicus curiae Aparajita Singh asserted that the Delhi government had not adhered to the disbursement schedule, stating, "The problem is that they are not adhering to the schedule."

After considering the arguments, Justice Kaul emphasized, "There can be no question of partial compliance. Complete compliance must take place per the schedule. List on December 7." This underscores the court's insistence on full compliance and rejects the notion of 'partial compliance.' The matter is scheduled for further consideration on December 7.

Justice Kaul commented, "The problem is you have to be arm-twisted to pay money that you are liable to pay." The court's directions were issued during the hearing of a petition filed by environmentalist and lawyer MC Mehta in 1985, addressing various forms of pollution in Delhi NCR. This case stands as one of the longest-standing continuing mandamus instances in environmental litigation.