SC junks plea seeking regulation of PVC flex boards in poll-bound Kerala
Mail This Article
New Delhi: With Kerala preparing for Assembly elections in April, the Supreme Court of India on Friday refused to entertain a petition seeking regulation of PVC flex boards in the State.
While hearing the matter, the bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi orally observed that the plea appeared to be part of a “political battle” and that the reliefs sought seemed intended to “embarrass the State Government before the elections.”
However, the Court granted the petitioner liberty to explore other remedies, including seeking intervention in related proceedings pending before the Kerala High Court concerning flex boards.
The petition was filed by an NGO, Human Rights Foundation, challenging the High Court’s refusal to entertain its plea aimed at addressing pollution caused by plastic products, particularly PVC flex boards.
Commenting on the timing of the petition, CJI Kant remarked, “The timing of the petition, in Kerala elections are coming. You are seeking to restrain the State Government. How many States we can keep on restraining? The problem is, people start fighting political battles in this Court also, whether in Kerala, or A State, B State. Now, all prayers are only to embarrass the State Government, to create some difficult situation for them.”
Counsel for the petitioner submitted that certain other states had passed orders restricting the use of PVC flex boards. Justice Bagchi noted that before the High Court, the State had informed that orders regulating the boards had already been issued and assured that they would be implemented. He added that the validity of those orders had been challenged by an association of flex board manufacturers and the matter was being examined by another High Court bench.
“You people want to create some impediment for whatever election campaign...” CJI Kant observed.
Disposing of the matter, the Supreme Court granted the petitioner liberty to approach the High Court for appropriate relief.
(With Live Law inputs)