ASSIGNMENT ON ENVIRONMENTAL LAW

TOPIC: WHAT IS AIR POLLUTION

EXPLAIN THE PROVISIONS REGARDING THE
PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION

SUBMITTED BY
VENI B
Roll No. 59
IXth BCOM LLB
KERALA LAW ACADEMY LAW COLLEGE

1
CONTENTS

1. TABLE OF CASES 3

2. ABBREVIATIONS 4

3. INTRODUCTION 5-6

4. AIR POLLUTION 7-9

5. PROVISIONS FOR PREVENTION AND CONTROL

OF AIR POLLUTION 9-16
6. RELATED CASE LAWS 16-21

7. CONCLUSION 22

8. BIBLIOGRAPHY 23

2
TABLE OF CASES

1. Charanlal Sahu v. Union Of India

1990 1 SCC 598 21
2. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India
AIR 1987 SC 1086 17
3. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India
1991 SCR (1) 866 18
4. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India
1992 3 SCC 268 19
5. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India
(1996) 4 SCC 750 20
6. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India
(1997) 2 SCC 353 20
7. Shri Ram Fertilizers v. Union of India
1986 SCR (1) 312 16
8. T. Damodar Rao v. Muncipal Corporation Hyderabad
AIR 1987 AP 171 21
9. Union Carbide Corportation v. Union of India
AIR 1990 SC 273 17

3
ABBREVIATIONS

1. AIR – All India Reporter

2. SCR – Supreme Court Reports

3. SCC – Supreme Court Cases

4. SC – Supreme Court

5. AP – Andhra Pradesh

4
INTRODUCTION

The United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (the

Stockholm Conference) was an international conference
summoned under United Nations support held in Stockholm,
Sweden from 5th -16th June, 1972. It was the UN's first major
conference on international environmental issues and marked a
turning point in the development of international environmental
politics. A declaration under the head “The Magna Carta of our
Environment” was made in the Conference. This is known as the
Stockholm Declaration of 1972. In this conference, it was decided
that the countries would undertake steps to preserve the natural
resources, which also includes air. India was represented by the
then Prime Minister Mrs. Indira Gandhi. The recommendations
of the Stockholm Declaration drew the attention of member states
towards environmental pollution, protection and promotion. The
United Nations Environmental Programme [UNEP] was set up in
Geneva in 1973 make every effort for the successful

5
implementation of Stockholm declaration. One hundred and
thirteen states including India participated in the Conference.

Accordingly, the Indian government enacted specific laws

under Article 253 of the Constitution for the preservation of
natural resources and the law enacted for air preservation was The
Air (Prevention and Control of Air Pollution) Act, 1981. The
Preamble of the Act states that the Act is for the prevention,
control and abatement of air pollution and establishment of
Boards for the purposes of conferring on and assigning powers
and functions thereto and for matters connected therewith.

6
AIR POLLUTION

The importance of air for life sustenance need not be exaggerated

as the major component of the biosphere is air without which no
life can survive (of course, except some lower forms of bacteria).
It is needless to state that without air of good quality there cannot
be healthy life. Pollution of air is more widespread in its adverse
effect than other forms of pollution on people who have to breathe
the air1. Preservation of the quality of air and control of air
pollution in India is governed by the Air (prevention and Control
of Pollution) Act 1981. Sections 3 and 4 of the Air Act makes it
clear that the Central and State Boards constituted under the
Water Act shall also exercise the powers and functions of the
Central and State Pollution Control Boards for the prevention and
control of air pollution under this Act.

Section 2(a) of the Act defines the term “air pollutant”, means any
solid, liquid or gaseous substance [including noise] present in the
atmosphere in such concentration as may be or tend to be

1 ARUNA VENKAT, ”ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND POLICY”, 2011, P.272

7
injurious to human beings or other living creatures or plants or
property or environment2.

Section 2(b) of the Act deals with the term “Air pollution”. Air
pollution means the presence in the atmosphere of any air
pollutant3.

Air Pollution has been defined by Expert Committee of the

Central Pollution Control Board, thus:

Air pollution means the presence in the outer atmosphere,

of one or more contaminants such as dust, fumes, gas, mist, odour,
smoke or vapour in such quantities, and of such characteristics
and duration, as to be injurious to humans, plants or animal life
or to property, or which unreasonably interfere with the
comfortable enjoyment of life and property4.

Air pollution means many things to many people. To some, it is

the reduction of visibility which interferes with automobile and
airplane traffic and views of natural grandeur. To the house
holder, it may be the source of eye and throat irritation, causing
acute and chronic respiratory diseases which at worse may lead

2 AMIT AVINASH NANDA, “THE AIR (PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION) ACT, 1981”, 2020, P.2
3 Ibid.
4 Supra n.1 at p.273

8
to increased death rates, and soiled clothing. To the farmer it may
be damaged vegetation. To the industrialist it may be problems of
process control. To the legalist and others interested in public
laws and industrial property protection, it is a matter of great
economic concern. To the ecologist, it means air quality
degradation and toxicity to the life supporting atmosphere5. As
per section 3 and 4 of the Air Act the Central Pollution Board
confers certain functions upon both the Central Board and State
Board respectively. Some of such functions are to advise on any
matter regarding the prevention, control and abatement of air
pollution, to co-ordinate the activities, provide technical
assistance and guidance, gather and circulate statistical data in
connection to air pollution, to enact standard for the quality of air,
etc.

PROVITIONS UNDER THE ACT FOR PREVENTION AND

CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION

The parameters regarding the prevention, control and abatement

of air pollution is dealt under sections 19 to 31 A of the Air Act.

5 S.K. AGARWAL, “AIR POLLUTION”, 2009, P.6

9
POWER TO DECLARE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AREAS:
(1) The State Government may, after consultation with the
State Board, by notification in the Official Gazette declare
in such manner as may be prescribed, any area or areas
within the State as air pollution control area or areas for
the purposes of this Act.
(2) The State Government may, after consultation with the
State Board, by notification in the Official Gazette,-
(a) alter any air pollution control area whether by way of
extension or reduction ;
(b) declare a new air pollution control area in which may
be merged one or more existing air pollution control areas
or any part or parts thereof.
(3) If the State Government, after consultation with the State
Board, is of opinion that the use of any fuel, other than an
approved fuel, in any air pollution control area or part
thereof, may cause or is likely to cause air pollution, it
may, by notification in the Official Gazette, prohibit the
use of such fuel in such area or part thereof with effect
from such date (being not less than three months from the

10
 date of publication of the notification) as may be specified
in the notification.
(4) The State Government may, after consultation with the
State Board, by notification in the Official Gazette, direct
that with effect from such date as may be specified
therein, no appliance, other than an approved appliance,
shall be used in the premises situated in an air pollution
control area :
Provided that different dates may be specified for
different parts of an air pollution control area or for the
use of different appliances.
(5) If the State Government, after consultation with the State
Board, is of opinion that the burning of any material (not
being fuel) in any air pollution control area or part hereof
may cause or is likely to cause air pollution, it may, by
notification in the Official Gazette, prohibit the burning of
such material in such area or part thereof6.
Section 19 of the Act provides that the State
Government can declare an area as air pollution control
area and can also prohibit use of any fuel in any air
6 Supra n.2 at p.13

11
 pollution control area if the use of such fuel is likely to
cause air pollution.

POWER TO GIVE INSTRUCTIONS FOR ENSURING

STANDARDS FOR EMMISSIONS FROM AUTOMOBILES:

According to section 20, so as to guarantee the norms of

discharge of air pollutant from automobiles the State Government
will offer guidelines to the concerned authority accountable for
registration of motor vehicles. At the point when the State
Government gives guidelines the registering authority will go
about according to such guidance.

POWER OF THE STATE BOARD TO IMPOSE RESTRICTION

ON THE USE OF CERTAIN INDUSTRIAL PLANTS :

As per section 21, no person will build up or work any

industrial plant in an air contamination control region without the
previous consent of the State Board. The application should be
made in proper form and in prescribed manner along with the
prescribed fee and must contain the details of the industrial plant.
On the receipt of the application, the State Board after necessary
enquiry, either grant or refuse consent within a period of 4
months.

12
Every person to whom consent is granted by the State Board shall
comply with the following conditions:

i) The control equipment as the State Board may approve

shall be installed and operated in the premises where
industry is to be carried on;
ii) The existing control equipment, if any, shall be replaced or
altered in accordance with the directions of the State Board;
iii) The control equipment shall be kept at all times in good
running conditions;
iv) Chimney wherever necessary, shall be erected as specified
by the State Board7.
After the installation or alteration or replacement or
erection or re-erection of any control equipment shall be
installed or altered or erected with the previous approval of
the State Board.
According to section 31 any individual aggrieved by an
order made by the State Board may within 30 days from the
date on which the order is conveyed to him, lean toward an
appeal to the Appellate Authority. Section 31 provides that

7 Ibid at p.16

13
 whoever failing to comply with the provisions of section 21
shall be made liable with imprisonment for a period not less
than one year and six months but may extend to 6 years and
with fine.

NOT TO ALLOW EMISSION OF AIR POLLUTANTS IN

EXCESS OF THE STANDARDS LAID DOWN BY THE STATE
BOARD :

Section 22 of the Act provides that no person operating in

any air pollution control area shall discharge or cause or permit to
be discharged the emission of any air pollutant in excess of the
standards laid down by the State Board8.

Whoever failing to comply with the provisions contained in

section 22 shall be made liable in accordance with section 37.

POWER OF BOARD TO MAKE APPLICATIONS TO THE

COURT FOR RESTRAINING PERSONS FROM CAUSING AIR
POLLUTION :

By goodness of section 22 A, if Central and State Board

cognized that the emission of any air contamination in excess of
the norms set by the State Board is probably going to happen by

8 Ibid at p.17

14
the activity of an industrial plant in any air pollution control area,
the court may make an application to the court not below the
Judicial Magistrate of first class for request controlling the
individual working the industrial plant from emitting such toxic
air pollutant. On application if court may think fit direct the
person to refrain from doing action which is likely to cause such
emissions.

As per section 39 any person who contravenes the direction

of the court shall be made liable for a term which may extend to
3 months or with fine which may extend to Rs.10000/-

POWER TO GIVE DIRECTIONS :

Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, but

subject to the provisions of this Act, and to any directions that the
Central Government may give in this behalf, a Board may, in the
exercise of its powers and performance of its functions under this
Act, issue any directions in writing to any person, officer or
authority, and such person, officer or authority shall be bound to
comply with such directions.

15
Explanation.-For the avoidance of doubts, it is hereby declared
that the power to issue directions under this section, includes the
power to direct-

(a) the closure, prohibition or regulation of any industry,

operation or process; or

(b) the stoppage or regulation of supply of electricity, water or

any other service9.

Following are the important case laws with regard to air pollution:

Shri Ram Fertilizer v. Union of India10 also known as ‘Oleum Gas

leak case’, the significant questions raised were related to the
scope of Article 21 and Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
The basis on which damages in case of such liability should be
quantified, whether such large enterprises should be allowed to
continue to function in thickly populated areas and if so
permitted, what measures should be adopted to reduce the risks to
minimum to the workers and community. The court
recommended that a national policy for location of hazardous

9 Supra n.2 at p.24

10 1986 SCR (1) 312

16
industries in areas of scarce pollution highlighting the need of
setting up neutral scientific expertise body which could act as an
information bank for the courts and the government departments
and recommended for establishing ‘environmental courts’ to deal
with cases of environmental pollution.

In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India11, the Supreme Court held that

the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution includes right
to live in a pollution-free environment.

In Bhopal Gas Disaster case, i.e. Union Carbide Corporation v.

Union of India12, this case arose out of the Bhopal gas disaster
which was undoubtedly the worst industrial accident in the
history, killing over 3500 people and injuring as many as 200000
others. After a few months of this tragedy, Parliament enacted the
Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster (Processing of Claims) Act, 1985.
With a view to ensuring that claims arising out of the Gas disaster
were dealt with speedily, effectively and equitably, the Act
authorized the Indian Government to represent all the claimants
both within and outside India.

11 AIR 1987 SC 1086

12 AIR 1990 SC 273

17
The Supreme Court directed Union Carbide Corporation and
Union Carbide India Limited to provide medical facilities to those
who might develop medical problems in the future. The court also
ordered the establishment of a full-fledged hospital of at least 500
beds with best equipment for treatment of MIC-related afflictions
within 18 months. The Court also directed the Government of MP
to provide the required land to the hospital.

In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Vehicular Pollution Case)13

• In this case, a writ petition was filed by M.C. Mehta

regarding air pollution caused due to vehicular emissions.
He prayed for the Court to pass appropriate orders to
prevent pollution.
• The Court held that environmental protection is the
responsibility of the State as enshrined in the Directive
Principles of State Policy and Articles 48 A and 51 A of
the Constitution. The Supreme Court observed that the
right to a healthy environment was a basic human right and
this included the right to clean air, covered under the ambit
of Article 21 of the Constitution. In this way, the Court

13 1991 SCR (1) 866

18
 expanded the scope of Article 21 to include the right to a
healthy environment and clean air under the fundamental
rights.
• This paved the way for the introduction of lead-free petrol
supply in Delhi and paved the way for the introduction of
compressed natural gas (CNG). The Court also assisted in
setting up a committee that was not just aimed at litigation
but also finding long term solutions to the air pollution
problem in Delhi14.

In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India15, the Supreme Court took

seriously the environmental pollution due to stone crushing
activities in and around Delhi, Faridabad and Ballabgargh
complexes. The court passed an order directing the stoner
crushing units to stop their activities in the above areas. It was
observed that every citizen has a right to fresh air and to life in
pollution free environment. The court further ordered the
Government to rehabilitate the stone crushers in crushing zones
within a period of 6 months.

14 Ishaan Banerjee, An Overview of the Air (Prevention and Control of Air Pollution) Act 1981, iPleaders, 25 sep
2020, 9.30 pm.
15 (1992) 3 SCC 268

19
In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India16, a public interest litigation, was
filed to protect Delhi from the environmental pollution caused by
the hazardous and noxious industries operating at Delhi. The
Supreme Court held that such industries are liable to be shifted
from the city of Delhi. The court directed shifting of 168
industries operating in the city. To mitigate the hardship to the
employees of such industries due to their closure of shifting, the
Supreme Court also specified the rights and benefits to which the
workmen employed in these industries were entitled on shifting
of those industries. Thus the Supreme Court protected the right to
livelihood of the workmen and tried to balance the industrial
development and environmental protection.

In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India17, popularly known as the Taj

Mahal case, the Supreme Court directed that the industries
operating in Trapezium Zone using coal as industrial fuel must
stop functioning and they should be shifted to the alternative site
provided under the Agra Master Plan. In this case also the
Supreme Court specified the rights and benefits to which the
workmen of such industries were entitled and thus protected their

16 (1996) 4 SCC 750

17 (1997) 2 SCC 353

20
right to livelihood and followed the guiding principle of
sustainable development.

In T. Damodar Rao v. Muncipal Corporation Hyderabad18, the

court pointed out that in view of Articles 48-A and 51-A(g) of the
Constitution, the protection of environment is not only the duty
of citizen but it is also the obligation of the State and all State
organs including Courts. It was further held that the slow
poisoning by the polluted atmosphere caused by environmental
pollution should also be regarded as amounting to violation of
Article 21 of the Constitution.

In Charanlal Sahu v. Union of India19, the Supreme Court held

that it is the duty of the State to take effective steps to protect the
right of life and liberty which includes pollution free air and
water. In this case the Supreme Court was examining the
Constitutional validity of Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster (Processing
of Claims) Act, 1985. The Supreme Court held that the Act was
constitutionally valid.

18 AIR 1987 AP 171

19 (1990) 1 SCC 598

21
CONCLUSION

In India, the worry for ecological insurance has not exclusively

been raised to the status of major rule that everyone must follow,
however it is additionally married with common liberties
approach and it is presently settled that, it is the essential basic
liberty of each person to live in contamination free condition with
full human nobility. Air contamination has for some time been a
major issue in the India, reflecting both the significance of
profoundly dirtying ventures for the public economy and political
factors, for example, the low need of ecological issues and
absence of public support. Additionally, it influencing each thing
including condition, for example, general wellbeing in India is in
genuine danger and ecological effect on the atmosphere which is
a significant factor for farming that Indians rely upon for living.
Notwithstanding , Indian government has a few arrangements ,for
instance changing to a cleaner fuel, set standards to lessen the
discharges , and do battle to spread information about the impacts
of contamination and about how they can by and by assist will be
critical to make a culture that qualities the earth.

22
BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Aruna Venkat, “ENVIRONMENTAL LAW AND POLICY”,

PHI Learning Private Limited, New Delhi, 2011.

2. S.K. Agarwal, “AIR POLLUTION”, APH Publishing

Corporation, New Delhi, 2009.

3. Amit Avinash Nanda, “The Air (Prevention and Control of

Pollution) Act, 1981”, Current Publications, Mumbai, 2020.

4. Ishaan Banerjee, An Overview of the Air (Prevention and

Control of Air Pollution) Act 1981, iPleaders, 25 Sep 2020.

23