Tuesday, October 20, 2026
Ranjit Devraj
- Three days of rioting by thousands of workers, which crippled life in the the Indian capital this week, has pitted the political rulers of Delhi state against the country’s apex court.
The government of Delhi state, which is ruled by India’s main opposition Congress party, says the Supreme Court has gone too far with its concern for environmental protection.
It is complaining that the court’s order to remove thousands of polluting and hazardous industrial units from the capital, has snatched the livelihood of tens of thousands of low-income workers.
As officials began sealing the factories Monday to comply with the court’s orders, enraged owners and workers took to the streets of business-like Delhi, where mass agitations are a rarity.
Angry mobs of workers blocked traffic, torched buses and battled policemen with stones and bricks. At least three persons have been killed in retaliatory firing by the police.
The chief minister of Delhi, Sheila Dixit, a senior Congress leader, has declared that her government cannot allow over a million people to become jobless overnight.
The state government says it will amend zoning laws to allow the factories to operate within the capital, though with modifications of their operations.
However, the Supreme Court declared Tuesday that it would not bow down to blackmail by “hooligans”. The judiciary said the Delhi government could not take shelter behind the plea that closing the offending units would lead to violence and unrest.
The dispute centres on the about 50,000 factories making an assortment of electrical parts, automobile accessories and household goods. Most of these units are located within residential areas of the capital and are considered to be a serious environmental and public health hazard.
Pollution control laws are rarely enforced in India and in recent years the country’s apex court has been compelling the government to ensure compliance.
However, Dixit said the relocation of the units outside the state would also cause her government to lose hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue earnings from these factories.
Apart from a stern Supreme Court which has threatened erring officials with contempt action, Dixit has to reckon with the federal government of Congress arch-foe, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
On Wednesday, federal Urban Development Minister, Jagmohan, who belongs to Delhi, blamed successive Delhi state governments for ignoring the four-year-old orders of the Supreme Court to remove polluting and hazardous industries from residential areas.
“It was only when the Supreme Court issued contempt notices to Delhi’s chief secretary (the top state government official), that officials began sealing the polluting units leading to a massive public outcry,” Jagmohan told Indian Parliament.
His ministry was prepared to amend the Delhi zoning plan and acquire more land to relocate some of the industries from residential areas, he said. The minister, however, said his ministry would appeal to the Supreme Court to allow more time to relocate the units.
Speaking in the house, opposition Marxist lawmaker Jeevan Roy said it was not enough to amend the zoning plan. He demanded that the federal and Delhi state governments should consult workers and their unions before taking a decision.
“No one is talking about compensation for units which are to be relocated and the workers they employ who are likely to suffer from the dislocation,” Roy said.
However, former prime minister Chandra Shekhar backed the Supreme Court’s order. He told parliament that drastic action was necessary to control the growing environmental pollution in the national capital, which had become a public health menace.
Those criticising the Supreme Court’s order, refer to the large- scale relocation of hundreds of industrial units from the Indian capital four years ago, also under the court’s orders.
According to a survey by the people’s group, the Delhi People’s Empowerment Forum, this led to more than 50,000 workers losing their jobs. Most of these workers were never compensated because they were employed as casual workers.