The Supreme Court on Monday asked why the Union government decided to ban only three out of 27 pesticides its draft notification had identified for disuse even as the Centre said the continuous evaluation process on use of safe insecticide should not turn the court into a forum for producers to settle their business rivalry.
Dealing with a bunch of petitions demanding ban on over 100 pesticides still in use in India despite being banned in western world for their harmful effects on children, a bench headed by CJI DY Chandrachud asked additional solicitor general Vikramjit Banerjee to explain the rationale behind choosing only three of the 27 pesticides to be banned.
Banerjee said Centre in its status report has explained the process of evaluation and has nothing to hide. Taking a swipe at the petitioners for continuously expanding the list of pesticides to be banned in India, he said, "Different corporate houses produce different pesticides. The court should not be used as a forum for corporate warfare."
"There is a robust regime in place to continuously evaluate the pesticides and their effects on human beings. Just because certain pesticides are banned in the USA, it does not mean these should be banned in India. Our climatic, soil and agricultural conditions are very different from the USA," the ASG said.
The CJI-led bench said the Centre's draft notification, on the basis of reports by committees headed by Dr S K Khurana and Dr T P Rajendran, had listed out 27 harmful pesticides.
"The government had accepted the recommendations and decided to ban them. What made you ban only three? We want to be satisfied about the nature of the process followed," it said.
The ASG said the government has nothing to hide and would put the reports of the committees before the court. "But can the petitioners ask the Court to evaluate which pesticide to be banned, which is clearly the exclusive work of the government," he asked.
Undeterred, the bench asked the government to file a fresh status report explaining the process and also place on record the reports of the two committees within four weeks.
Source Link
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure .
0 Comments