With Diwali approaching, the Supreme Court finds itself in an unexpected position: two arms of the Indian government cannot agree on whether the country's next generation of so-called green firecrackers should be allowed into the market at all, and the environment ministry has effectively asked the court to make the call. At the centre of the dispute is a chemical called barium nitrate, and whether its presence in new firecracker formulations makes them legal or not. What the disagreement is about The Council of Scientific and Industrial Research's National Environmental Engineering Research Institute, better known as CSIR-NEERI, has given its approval to the new green cracker formulations. Its position is that these crackers meaningfully reduce pollution, cutting emissions by anywhere between 40 and 60 per cent compared to conventional firecrackers. That is not a small margin, and CSIR-NEERI's backing carries weight given that it is the country's premier environmental research body. But the Central Pollution Control Board, the statutory authority responsible for monitoring and enforcing pollution norms across India, has pushed back hard. Its objection is straightforward: these crackers still contain barium nitrate, a chemical that the Supreme Court has already banned. If the court prohibited it, the CPCB argues, no approval from any other agency changes that fact. The Petroleum and Explosives Safety Organisation, which regulates explosive substances in India, has issued a no-objection certificate to the new formulations. So you now have one central scientific body approving them, one regulatory body approving them on safety grounds, and one pollution watchdog saying none of that matters because a banned chemical is still in the mix. Why barium nitrate matters Barium nitrate is an oxidiser used in firecrackers to produce vivid green-coloured flames and improve burn efficiency. It has been a standard ingredient in conventional crackers for decades. The Supreme Court's earlier orders restricting its use were driven by concerns about the toxic compounds it releases when burned, which contribute to the fine particulate matter that makes post-Diwali air in Indian cities, particularly in the north, hazardous for days. The entire premise of green crackers was to move away from such chemicals. The fact that barium nitrate is still present in these new formulations, even if in different concentrations or combinations, is precisely what makes the CPCB's objection difficult to dismiss. Where the government stands Faced with two of its own agencies at odds with each other, the environment ministry has done something that reflects just how politically and legally complicated this issue is. It filed an affidavit before the Supreme Court laying out both positions and, rather than backing either one, left the final decision entirely to the court. It is a rare admission that the government itself does not have a unified answer, and it places the Supreme Court in the position of having to adjudicate a scientific and regulatory dispute that its own expert bodies cannot resolve internally. What is at stake India's firecracker industry, concentrated largely in Sivakasi in Tamil Nadu, employs hundreds of thousands of workers and generates thousands of crores in revenue annually, with Diwali accounting for the bulk of sales. The green cracker programme was introduced as a way to keep the industry alive while addressing the severe air quality crisis that follows every Diwali in cities like Delhi, where pollution levels routinely spike to dangerous levels in the days after the festival. If the Supreme Court sides with the CPCB and rules that barium nitrate renders these formulations non-compliant, commercial production cannot proceed and the industry heads into another Diwali season under a cloud of uncertainty. If it accepts CSIR-NEERI's position and the PESO clearance as sufficient, green crackers go to market, but with a pollution watchdog on record saying they contain a chemical the court itself once prohibited. The court is yet to set a date for its final ruling on the matter.(With TOI inputs)