You are here: Home » Current Affairs » News » National
Business Standard

Bombay HC declines to stay implementation of govt's decision of plastic ban

The bench, however, protected citizens from prosecution for their possession for a period of three months

Press Trust of India  |  Mumbai 

Maharashtra bans plastic: Beverage, dairy firms plan new packaging plans

The on Friday declined to stay the implementation of the government's decision to ban plastic materials, but protected citizens from prosecution for their possession for a period of three months.

The court, while giving an interim ruling on a bunch of petitions opposing the ban, maintained it cannot overlook the adverse impact of plastic waste on the environment.

On March 23 this year, the government issued a notification, imposing a ban on manufacture, use, sale, distribution and storage of all plastic materials like one- time use bags, spoons, plates, PET and PETE bottles and also thermacol items.

The notification gave a period of three months to the manufacturers, distributors and retailers to dispose of the existing stock of the banned items.

Consumers/users were, however, given only a period of one month to dispose the same.

The notification was challenged in the HC by plastic, PET bottle and and retailer associations on the ground the ban was arbitrary, bad in law and violates their fundamental right to livelihood.

Petitions challenging the notification had sought an interim stay on the implementation of the ban pending hearing of their pleas.

A division bench of Justices and today refused to stay the notification after observing the court cannot ignore the adverse effects of plastic waste on the environment.

"We are aware that the petitioners and all those persons involved in the business of plastic materials may suffer loss due to the ban.

"However, we have to consider the impact of plastic waste on the environment and the eco-system in general and the effect thereof on citizens. The harmful effects of plastic waste are multifold," the court said.

The bench added that it does not feel that the imposition of such restrictions infringe upon the fundamental rights of the petitioners.

First Published: Fri, April 13 2018. 17:02 IST
RECOMMENDED FOR YOU