Supreme Court to hear a plea filed by an advocate regarding traffic density, air pollution and emission norms. The plea contends that the 10 and 15 years rule on vehicles is void and illegal.
Adv & petitioner-in-person: I will take 8 mins.
Nageswara Rao J: If you take more than that, we will impose a cost of Rs. 8 lacs.
Adv: Sure milords.
Rao J: You have seen the order of the NGT and every other order and still you are filing this petition. Are you sure about this?
Adv: Yes milords.
Rao J: We will impose heavy costs and pass comments which will also impact your career in the long term. Think about that.
Adv: Sure milords. I will take 8 mins.
Adv: Banning already existing vehicles will create more carbon footprints as manufacturing new cars and vehicles create more carbon footprints. That's why the 10 years and 15 years Rule is void. Why there is arbitrariness only for certain places? Why not everywhere?
Adv: Australia does not have such rule. United Kingdom, we copy a lot, but they also don't have such rules. Now coming to wear tear of tyres. The quality of "Chinese" tyres are better than Indian tyres.
Adv: Delhi has better traffic than Calcutta and Mumbai. The issues highlighted in the petition requires this court to make sure the laws are equal between the states. The public paid money for 15 years. the Supreme court said 10 years. Now, the owners have legitimate rights.
Adv: Delhi stands at 19 in terms of pollution. Still such a rule exists.
Order: Two advocates who are practising in the Supreme Court have entered into this misadventure. We warned them about this. An exemplary cost of Rs. 10 lacs is imposed on the petitioner. The registry will not entertain any writ petition by the advocate.
Bench: this is not a moot competition.
Bench: We will impose a 1 crore cost per minute. Just keep quiet.
Adv: This is affecting everyone.
Gavai J: Don't give a speech, this is not ram lila maidan. Argue. Don't give a speech.
Adv keeps interrupting.
Rao J: You still have not learned the lesson. Just go. Dismissed.