Guwahati: The High Court of Meghalaya has instructed all Deputy Commissioners to intensify efforts to curb plastic usage in their respective districts.
During a hearing on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) on Wednesday, a division bench comprising Chief Justice IP Mukerji and Justice W Diengdoh issued a series of directives aimed at reducing plastic pollution.
Ready for a challenge? Click here to take our quiz and show off your knowledge!
The bench ordered officials to continue organizing awareness programs highlighting the harmful effects of plastic on health, the environment, and the ecosystem.
They must also use public announcements, billboards, advertisements, wall writings, and other media to educate citizens about the dangers of plastic use.
In its order, the bench advised authorities to grant reasonable time to individuals who already possess plastic products under 120 microns in thickness, allowing them to return or dispose of the items responsibly. It further banned the manufacturing of such plastic within the state.
Ready for a challenge? Click here to take our quiz and show off your knowledge!
The court emphasized the need to crack down on illegal production by inspecting known areas of frequent use, seizing banned items, and penalizing offenders.
It also permitted the issuance of administrative orders to facilitate these actions.
The bench directed the Secretary representing the respondent administration to collect reports from all Deputy Commissioners and submit a consolidated report to the court by June 20.
The court had first entertained the PIL in August 2024 under the leadership of then Chief Justice S Vaidyanathan, who had emphasized the urgent need to ban plastic, citing its significant environmental drawbacks.
When the case came before Chief Justice Mukerji and Justice Diengdoh on November 21, 2024, they acknowledged the previous bench’s concerns but noted the practical difficulties in enforcing an immediate and complete ban.
They stressed that in the absence of affordable alternatives, an abrupt prohibition could disrupt the state’s economy.
Nonetheless, the bench highlighted the severe ecological consequences of plastic waste, including its long decomposition period, complications in recycling, and its role in choking waterbodies and drainage systems.
The court had previously directed the government advocate to submit an affidavit detailing the steps taken in compliance with its orders.
On Wednesday, Additional Advocate General T Yangi B submitted a report dated March 11, 2025.
Upon reviewing the report, the bench observed that meaningful action had been limited largely to East Khasi Hills district, with minimal enforcement in the remaining 11 districts.
While awareness efforts were underway, the court noted the lack of substantial progress in removing banned plastic products from circulation.
The bench stressed that holding awareness campaigns alone would not suffice.
It urged the administration to take firm and tangible steps to eliminate plastic items that violate the restrictions and to promote viable, cost-effective alternatives.