Due to a public interest lawsuit concerning air pollution in the state, a division bench of the Gujarat High Court has asked the government why it has not challenged a 2017 notification or any similar order declaring coal as an approved fuel.
In October 2017, the Gujarat Pollution Control Board (GPCB) had issued a notification specifying a list of 15 ‘approved fuels’ in the state, which included coal, lignite and petcoke, among others. The notification was issued in exercise of the powers conferred to GPCB under the provisions of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act. This notification was modified in 2018 imposing conditions to the usage of the approved fuels and again modified in 2019, barring the use of petcoke or furnace oil as a fuel in non-attainment cities (cities that don’t meet with acceptable levels of the National Ambient Air Quality standards as prescribed under the Air Act) as declared by the Central Pollution Control Board. These include Ahmedabad, Surat, Vadodara and Rajkot.
The division bench, in its order dated October 29 and made public on Saturday, noted: “There need not be any debate that the use of coal has a continued adverse effect on the environment and the lives of millions of people,” and that GPCB and the state government, “have the duty to provide clean air,” and “have the powers under the provisions of the Air Act to mandate the usage of PNG/CNG.”
Based on this, the bench thus called upon the state to respond as to why the Gazette Notification of 2017 of the GPCB “or any similar notification/order by which it declares coal to be an approved fuel under Section 2(d) of the Air Pollution Act be not struck down.”
The court also directed the state as well as the GPCB to “furnish information as regards the total consumption of coal in Gujarat per annum”, as well as of the number of industries across the state using coal as a medium of fuel.
Earlier, during the course of the hearing of the PIL on October 29, government pleader Manisha Shah, representing the state and the GPCB, had submitted that coal continues to be permitted for use in industries owing to difficulties in supplying natural gas to remote areas of the state due to absence of the gas network. The state had also justified that natural gas costs more, which may impact industries, and often the latter are provided subsidies in far-flung places.
The PIL filed by advocate Amit Panchal, appearing as party-in-person, has, especially, highlighted air polluting industries with the usage of coal and lignite, and the need to adhere to permissible pollution standards.