Medical Report Missing Injured's Signature, Unexplained 9-Hour FIR Delay Fatal To Prosecution Case: Allahabad High Court Acquits Attempt To Murder Convicts Fresh Notice Mandatory To Ex-Parte Defendants If Plaint Is Substantively Amended: Madhya Pradesh High Court Divorce | Initial Bickering Between Spouses During Early Marriage Does Not Constitute Cruelty: Madras High Court Sports Council Cannot Dissolve Registered Society Or Conduct Its Elections; Can Only Withdraw Recognition: Kerala High Court Incarceration Without Trial Amounts To Punishment: Himachal Pradesh HC Grants Bail To Murder Accused Denied Medical Care In Jail Compliance Is Not Protection: Kerala High Court Holds Local Authority Cannot Deny Industrial License Merely Over Unscientific Public Protests Allotment Of Seat By Bypassing Higher-Ranked Candidates In Merit List Results In Gross Injustice: Calcutta High Court Dismisses LLM Admission Plea Blacklisting Not An Automatic Consequence Of Contract Termination, Requires Specific Show-Cause Notice: Supreme Court Power Of Attorney Cannot Operate As Mode Of Succession To Religious Office Of Sajjadanashin: Supreme Court Higher-Ranking Employees Cannot Claim Parity In Punishment With Subordinates Under Article 14: Supreme Court Waqf Board Lacks Jurisdiction To Appoint 'Sajjadanashin', Civil Court Can Decide Dispute As Office Is Distinct From 'Mutawalli': Supreme Court 144 BNSS | Husband Cannot Directly Challenge Ex-Parte Maintenance Order In High Court, Must Apply For Recall: Allahabad High Court No Absolute Bar On Relying Upon Post-Notification Sale Deeds For Determining Land Acquisition Compensation: Bombay High Court 138 NI Act | Plea That Cheque Was Stolen Is An Afterthought If No Police Complaint Is Lodged: Orissa High Court Upholds Conviction Cannot Expect Claimant To Preserve Every Bill: P&H High Court Enhances Accident Compensation From Rs 95,000 To Rs 7.7 Lakhs

Supreme Court Halts Immediate Action Against 10-Year Diesel & 15-Year Petrol Vehicles in Delhi-NCR

12 August 2025 9:42 PM

By: Deepak Kumar


Supreme Court Halts Immediate Action Against 10-Year Diesel & 15-Year Petrol Vehicles in Delhi-NCR

Bench Protects Vehicle Owners Pending Review of 2018 Age-Based Ban

The Supreme Court today, August 12, ordered that no coercive action will be taken against owners of 10-year-old diesel and 15-year-old petrol vehicles in Delhi-NCR, granting interim relief in the ongoing MC Mehta environmental litigation.

The bench of CJI BR Gavai, Justice K Vinod Chandran, and Justice NV Anjaria passed the direction while hearing a batch of pleas linked to the controversial age-based ban. The Court also issued notice on the Delhi Government’s review petition against the 2018 ruling that upheld the ban.

Delhi Government Pushes for Stay on Ban – Calls Policy Arbitrary

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Delhi Government, urged the Court to pause enforcement, warning that the existing rule compels police to seize such vehicles immediately. He argued the policy was arbitrary since private vehicle owners face mandatory scrapping, while the same vehicles used commercially can operate beyond the age limit.

Delhi Govt’s Review Petition Seeks Scientific Study on Pollution Impact

The Delhi Government’s plea highlights that since 2018, stricter emission monitoring standards and expanded pollution testing coverage have been implemented. It seeks: A comprehensive scientific assessment by the Union Government and Commission for Air Quality Management on the actual environmental benefit of the ban.

Reevaluation of the policy based on fitness standards rather than arbitrary age limits.

From NGT Orders to Present Courtroom Clash

In 2015, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) banned diesel vehicles over 10 years old and petrol vehicles over 15 years from plying in Delhi-NCR to curb pollution. The Supreme Court in 2018 upheld this directive.
In 2024, the Delhi Government issued End-of-Life Vehicle (ELV) Guidelines, ordering fuel outlets to stop supplying fuel to such vehicles from July 1, 2025 — a move put on hold after public backlash.

Intervention Pleas Seek Clarity on Effective Date & Fitness-Based Criteria

Several intervention applications have also been filed, represented by Advocate Charu Mathur, demanding that:

1. Vehicle fitness — not age — be the main criterion for scrapping.
2. 2024 ELV Guidelines be struck down for lack of statutory backing.
3. The 2018 order be applied prospectively, protecting owners who purchased vehicles before its implementation.

MC Mehta v. Union of India – WP (C) No. 13029 of 1985 & IAs
Next Steps: Court notices issued to all parties; interim relief to continue until further orders.

Latest Legal News