What did the Bombay High Court say about Mumbai's air pollution?

The Bombay High Court criticized the BMC and MPCB for failing to ensure compliance with air pollution norms and demanded immediate, effective action.

What are the concerns raised by the Bombay High Court regarding construction sites?

The court expressed concern over the health of construction workers and directed authorities to issue advisories and ensure basic protection like masks.

What action has the BMC taken against pollution offenders?

The BMC stated that since November, it has issued 433 show-cause notices and 148 stop-work notices for non-compliance with guidelines.

Home / Environment / Bombay HC Slams BMC, MPCB on Air Pollution

Bombay HC Slams BMC, MPCB on Air Pollution

24 Dec

•

Summary

Bombay High Court critical of BMC and MPCB's compliance failures.
Court emphasizes need for immediate steps to curb escalating air pollution.
Authorities urged to protect construction workers' health with advisories.

Bombay HC Slams BMC, MPCB on Air Pollution

The Bombay High Court has expressed strong disapproval of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) and the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board (MPCB) regarding the escalating air pollution crisis in the city. The court emphasized that while it supports development, strict compliance with pollution control measures is paramount and has not been adequately enforced by the authorities.

During a hearing on petitions concerning the deteriorating air quality index, the bench, comprising Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad, directed both the BMC and MPCB to take immediate and effective steps. The court warned that failure to act decisively could render the situation unmanageable, underscoring the fundamental duty of these officials as citizens to address the issue.

Furthermore, the court specifically addressed the health concerns of construction workers, questioning the MPCB on advisories for project proponents and highlighting the workers' exposure to serious health threats. The bench pointed out that basic protective measures, such as providing masks, are common sense and a matter of fundamental rights, urging officials not to neglect the welfare of the less privileged.