Big and high-end diesel cars have better emission norms and pollute less than the commoner’s small cars, the Centre told the Supreme Court on Monday, challenging the court’s blanket ban on fresh registration of diesel luxury cars and SUVs with over 2000 CC engine capacity in the national capital.
“Big diesel cars and SUVs have better emission norms than smaller cars. Just because a car is big and powerful does not mean it is more polluting. Besides, the more expensive a car, say Rs. 75 lakh or Rs. 1.5 crore, the better it is equipped against pollution,” the Centre, represented by Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi, told the court.
Besides, the government warned the highest judiciary that if the seven-month ban, based on a December 16, 2015 order, continued, global car makers would opt to leave India for greener pastures, rendering lakhs of youths without jobs and FDI in a shambles.
“The ban was imposed when they were already conforming to emission norms. This showed inconsistency on our side in policy. Companies are fed up with the unpredictability and have said they will go away. These foreign companies have huge investments involved here,” Mr. Rohatgi submitted before a three-judge Bench, led by Chief Justice T.S. Thakur.
The government also challenged the Supreme Court’s authority to impose a cess when taxation came within the domain of the government. This was in response to an idea mooted by the court to make high-end diesel car buyers pay a hefty one-time anti-pollution cess or environmental compensatory charge for opting for a polluting fuel.
Instead, the Centre put its weight behind the car makers’ proposal to deposit with the government 1 per cent of the showroom price of every 2000 CC diesel vehicle bought in Delhi.
The money, which would go into the cause of reducing pollution, would be taken from the buyer.
Besides, Mr. Rohatgi said, the government was ready with a scheme by which persons with cars made before 2005 could sell their vehicles at designated government scrap yards.
“Walk in with an old car and sell it as scrap. That is what we are planning to implement by 2017. The costs are huge, but it is for the sake of public health as these 10 to 15 years old cars pollute 10 times more than big cars because they follow BS-II emission norms,” Mr. Rohatgi submitted.
The government's stand against the ban and the one-time cess saw a thaw in the court's attitude. Mr. Rohatgi requested the Bench not to impose the cess and hold its decision back by six weeks.
“We do not want to commit a mistake in this case or do something unconventional. Please do a study what can be done and tell us what can be done. We will hold it [cess] back,” Chief Justice Thakur responded, reserving its orders on the pleas of car makers to lift the ban.
But the Supreme Court-appointed Environment Pollution Control Authority (EPCA) advised the court against the car makers’ proposal to pay one per cent of the car’s showroom price towards combating pollution. It said the aim of the Supreme Court was to prevent ‘dieselisation’ and not allow car makers to pay money to allow them to continue to pollute.
It said the environment was a “public trust” and subject to inter-generational equity.
