The Delhi high court on Thursday told the AAP government to bring to its notice any official who was not complying with its orders on the issue of air pollution and said it will “take care of it.”
The Delhi high court on Thursday told the AAP government to bring to its notice any official who was not complying with its orders on the issue of air pollution and said it will “take care of it.”
“Every official sitting on every chair will have to do their job,” Justices Badar Durrez Ahmed and Sanjeev Sachdeva said when the Delhi government’s senior standing counsel Rahul Mehra said it cannot take action against the bureaucrats as such a step would be declared null and void by the Centre.
The bench said: “If a particular officer is not functioning or complying with our directions, bring it to our notice and we will take care of it.”
Mr Mehra also informed the court that the official earlier appointed to assist the court on the issue has gone on a two-month leave and no one else was willing to take his place.
The bench reacted, saying: “What do you mean not willing If an officer does not listen, throw them out.” It said, “If an official is not going to work, let him resign.” The government told the court that urban development special secretary S.S. Gill would take up the job now.
The court said that due to “decades of laxity (in implementing the law), we are suffering today” and noted that neither the Delhi government, nor the Centre were interested in taking concrete steps with regard to air pollution.
“They are only interested in taking steps for public consumption. No one seems to be keen on implementing the law. Each government is at the other’s neck,” it said.
The high court also came down heavily on the Delhi government and the Centre, saying “if you cannot govern, tell the people that you cannot govern. Do we tell you that we cannot deliver judgments due to some compulsion If you do not comply with our orders, we would be compelled to take recourse to Contempt of Court Act and then you cry hoarse against the same.”
The bench said that the “judiciary was not interested in getting brownie points. We are not contesting elections. We are not going to ask people for votes. We want law and justice to prevail. However, when we do this, there are news reports which say courts are getting overactive.”
