At this juncture, Justice Chandrachud said: “For farmers, the problem is incentivisation, and not enforcement… You cannot enforce these things.”Justice Kant told Mehta that small farmers are very poor and not in a good financial position to afford machines to facilitate in-situ crop residue management.He pointed out that stubble can be used for several other purposes such as as fodder for sheep and cows.Mehta said two lakh machines have been made available, which are 80 per cent subsidised and they are provided through cooperative societies.Justice Kant said: “I am a farmer, CJI is a farmer, we know it. We want to know how many such cooperative societies have been set up and how many machines have they supplied. What is the subsidy given?”Mehta submitted that marginal farmers were getting these machines at free-of-cost. But Justice Chandrachud shot back by saying that “give us some figures, say a sample of four districts. What is the total capital cost? Total outlay required?”Justice Chandrachud said: “Between thermal power plant and the farmer, what is the arrangement? Who is supposed to collect (stubble)?”, to which Justice Kant added, “Once paddy is harvested, the farmer is under compulsion to prepare the land for the next crop.”
Source link
