Today, the Supreme Court directed the Delhi government and other agencies to submit a clear action plan on how they will implement the long-term recommendations made by the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) to control air pollution in the capital.

A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant made it clear that the court will not entertain objections to the CAQM’s suggestions. The agencies have been given four weeks to place their action plan and timelines before the court.

Appearing for the CAQM, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati told the court that the commission has already submitted a detailed report outlining 15 long-term measures to tackle pollution in the Delhi-NCR region. The report also identifies the agencies responsible for implementing each recommendation.

According to the CAQM, vehicles are the biggest source of air pollution in Delhi-NCR. The commission has suggested a time-bound phase-out of highly polluting vehicles, use of remote sensing technology to monitor emissions, and faster expansion of electric vehicle charging infrastructure.

The report also recommends strengthening public transport by adding more buses, expanding metro lines, and improving regional rail connectivity. It proposes increasing environmental protection charges on luxury diesel vehicles and SUVs with engine capacity of 2,000 cc and above, along with expanding CNG and LNG fuel networks.

Apart from vehicular pollution, the CAQM’s proposals address dust from construction and demolition activities, road dust, industrial pollution, emissions from thermal power plants, and stubble burning.

The bench, which also included Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul Pancholi, noted suggestions such as installing advanced technologies like automated RFID systems at Delhi’s border entry points to monitor vehicle movement.

The court also asked the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and other agencies to explain why these recommendations should not be implemented without delay.

“We do not need objections. What we want is an action plan and a clear timeline for compliance,” the bench said.

The matter will be heard again after four weeks