Topic: offences, penalties and appeal under the air (prevention and control

of pollution) act, 1981

Subject: Environmental law

University: Shreemati Nathibai Damodar Thackersey Women's

University

Name: Callista Riya Jude

Roll no: 09

Class: 4rd year B.B.A LL.B.

Collage: SNDT women’s law school

Year: 2022 - 2023

Professor: Ms. Shruti Pandit

Submission date: 13th October, 2022

Acknowledgment

I would like to take this incentive to convey gratitude to Ms.Shruti Pandit , my environmental
law professor, and Mr.Rajesh P. Wankhede, our law school principal, provided me with the
amazing chance to do this project on the topic offences, penalties and appeal under the air (
prevention and control of pollution) act, 1981 , which also assisted me in doing a great deal of
research and learning about so many new things.

I am extremely grateful to them. Second, I'd like to thank all the people for their assistance in
completing this project in such a short period of time. It was only because of them that I was
able to develop my project and make it a fun and rewarding experience. I'm doing this project
not only for the grades, but also to expand my knowledge.

1|P a ge
SR.NO SUB.NO INDEX PAGE NO.

2 Introduction 3

3 The air (prevention and control of pollution) act, 1981 5

4 Offence and penalties under The air (prevention and control 6

of pollution) act, 1981

5 Appeal under The air (prevention and control of pollution) 9

act, 1981

6 Case law 10 - 16

a M.C. Mehta v. union of India (taj trapezium case) 10

b Arjun gopal v. union of India (cracker ban case) 13

c M.C. Mehta v. union of India (vehicular pollution case) 13

d M.C Mehta v. union of India (ban of private cars and suvs 14

using diesel)

e Own motion v. union of India 16

7 Conclusion and recommendation 17

8 Webliography and bibliography 19

2|P a ge
INTRODUCTION
Environmental law is an essential component of any government organisation. It consists of a
number of laws and regulations concerning water quality, air quality, and other environmental
issues. The success of environmental legislation is primarily determined by how it is
implemented. Legislation can also be used to educate people about their responsibility to keep
the environment healthy. Environmental law in India is founded on environmental law
principles and focuses on the management of natural resources such as minerals, forests, and
fisheries. In India, environmental law directly reflects the provisions of the Constitution. The
need to protect and preserve the environment, as well as to make sustainable use of natural
resources, is reflected in India's constitutional framework as well as in the country's
international obligations. However, despite numerous initiatives in the field of environmental
law to establish sustainability, India's growing economy continues to struggle with
environmental issues. Furthermore, Indian regulators are attempting to revise the country's
existing environmental rules and acts, which may result in more stringent company
requirements.1 These initiatives, however, will fail if we as a society do not prioritise them.
People's awareness is important in policy development, which is why we must work together
to address these major issues. To solve environmental issues, governments and non-
governmental organisations must collaborate, and environmental legislation should be
tightened. 2

The significance of environmental legislation stems from the fact that environmental protection
cannot be achieved in the absence of appropriate regulations and laws. Raising environmental
awareness and promoting environmental education are ways for people to protect the
environment rather than destroy it. Legislation, on the other hand, ensures that environmental
protection is actually implemented in everyday life. Legislation obligates businesses,
corporations, the general public, and industries, among others, to protect the environment and
prevent environmental degradation. It imposes severe penalties on those who violate the laws
and rules. Finally, this type of enforcement ensures that ideas and plans are translated into
practical environmental protection efforts. 3 Several environmental treaties and conventions
attempt to address environmental issues at the international level. The United Nations began to

1
https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/air-prevention-and-control-of-pollution-act-1981/
2
https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-6035-air-prevention-and-control-of-pollution-act-
1981.html#:~:text=Under%20Section%2039%2C%20any%20order,five%20thousand%20rupees%20every%20day
3
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_(Prevention_and_Control_of_Pollution)_Act
3|P a ge
emphasise environmental issues with the Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment
(1972). Since then, seventy international treaties, declarations, charters, and agreements have
been adopted by various nations. These efforts were made to protect the environment and to
strike a balance between human development and environmental conservation.
The government of India has made numerous acts to protect the environment and biodiversity.
Such as the wildlife (protection) act, 1972; the water (prevention and control) act, 1974; the
environment (protection) act, 1986. 4

This project covers THE AIR (PREVENTION AND CONTROL) ACT, 1981. The act
targets to control and prevent air pollution in India and its main objectives are:
 To provide for prevention, control, and abatement of air pollution.
 To provide for the establishment of the boards at the central and state levels to
implement the act.

Central pollution control board and State pollution control board were given the responsibility.
It states that the sources of air pollution such as internal combustion engines, industry, vehicles,
power plants, etc., are not permitted to release particulate matter, lead, carbon monoxide,
sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), or other toxic substances
beyond the predetermined limit. It empowers the state government to designate air pollution
areas.5

4
https://blog.ipleaders.in/environment-legislation-in-india/#Introduction
5
https://www.indiacode.nic.in/handle/123456789/1389?sam_handle=123456789/1362
4|P a ge
THE AIR (PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF AIR POLLUTION) ACT
1981

Many of us are probably aware of the winter plight of Delhi residents. The combination of
winter fog and smoke from stubble burning vehicles carried by the incoming northern winds
turns Delhi into a "gas chamber." In 2019, Delhi was named one of the world's most polluted
major cities. In these circumstances, we must examine the law enacted by India to combat air
pollution and determine whether it is adequate. Sweden proposed to the United Nations that a
global conference be held to discuss and prevent pollution and degradation of natural resources.
As a result, the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment was held in Stockholm
in June 1972, following the adoption of General Assembly Resolution 2398. It was decided at
this conference that the countries would take steps to preserve natural resources, including air.
As a result, the Indian government enacted specific laws for the preservation of natural
resources under Article 253 of the Constitution, and the law enacted for air preservation was
The Air (Prevention and Control of Air Pollution) Act, 1981.6

What is an ‘air pollutant’ and what is ‘air pollution’?

 Section 2(a) defines ‘air pollutant’ as any solid, liquid or gaseous substance that may
be harming or injuring the environment, humans, other living creatures, plants or
even property. Through a 1987 Amendment, the noise was also included in the list
of substances that are deemed to be harmful to the environment. Therefore, this Act
also provides for the regulation of noise pollution.
 Section 2(b) defines ‘air pollution’ as the presence of any air pollutant in the
atmosphere.7

6
https://www.clearias.com/environmental-laws-india/
7

https://egyankosh.ac.in/bitstream/123456789/60186/1/The%20Air%20%28Prevention%20and%20Control%20of%20Polluti
on%29%20Act%201981.pdf
5|P a ge
OFFENCES AND PENALTIES UNDER THE AIR (PREVENTION AND
CONTROL) ACT, 1981

The Crime in India Statistics published annually by the ‘National Crime Records Bureau’
(NCRB) started including ‘environment related offences’ from the year 2014. It has been only
8 years since such data has been made available for analysis of the trend of such offences. The
Crime in India Statistics contains a dedicated chapter on ‘environment related offences’ which
at present covers only five environment statutes. As per the statistics, a total of 299 offences
were reported under the Environmental (Protection) Act, 1986 (EPA) in the year 2015. Only
50 offences were reported in the same year under the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution)
Act, 1981 (Air Act). The NCRB 2015 data does not however reveal the number of persons
actually convicted out of the total number of cases registered. 8
It is interesting to note that 42 out of 50 offences recorded under the Air Act in 2015 were from
the state of Maharashtra alone and the remaining offences were reported from Rajasthan,
Karnataka, West Bengal and Jharkhand. The World Health Organisation: Global Urban
Ambient Air Pollution Database 2022 (WHO Report) report published a list of 20 most polluted
cities in the world and 10 out of the 20 cities published were cities located in India. These
included Gwalior, Allahabad, Patna, Raipur, Delhi, Ludhiana, Kanpur, Khanna, Firozabad and
Lucknow. However, no offences under the Air Act have been reported in these cities.
The Air Act provides that where any person establishes or operates any industrial plant without
the consent order of the State Board, or exceeds prescribed standards for emission of air
pollutants as laid down by the State Board, or fails to comply with the directions issued by the
Board, then such persons shall be punished with a minimum imprisonment of one year and six
months and fine [Section 37 of the Air Act]. Further, the Act also states that the court shall take
cognizance of any offence when a complaint is made by (i) a Board or an authorised officer,
(ii) any person who has given notice of not less than sixty days in the prescribed manner to
make a complaint to the Board or authorised officer [Section 43 of the Air Act]9
The NCRB data 2015 reveals inaction and negligence on the part of the members and officers
of the Pollution Control Board in registering complaints under the Air Act which is a part of
their official duty. ‘The Cost of Air Pollution: Strengthening the Economic Case for Action,
the World Bank and Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation University of Washington,
Seattle, 2016’ reveals that air pollution is the fourth leading fatal health risk worldwide after

8
Crime in India 2015 Statistics, National Crime Records Bureau, Ministry of Home Affairs .
9
https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A1981-14.pdf
6|P a ge
metabolic risks, dietary risks and tobacco smoke. Such statistics reinforce the fact that there is
an urgent need to reduce and control air pollution. The enforcement agencies under EPA and
the Air Act need to discharge their duties not just effectively but also in a proactive manner so
that India is able to take charge of the problem of air pollution.

 Under Section 37, whoever fails to comply with the provisions of Section 21, 22 and
the directions issued under Section 31A, can be sentenced to imprisonment for a term
of one year and six months. This sentence can be extended to six years and with fine, if
the requisite compliances under the aforesaid sections are still not carried out, with an
additional fine of five thousand rupees every day.
 Under Section 38, penalties for certain acts are laid down. These acts are-
1. Destroying, defacing, removing etc any pillar, post, stake or notice fixed in the ground
under the authority of the Board.
2. Obstruction of any person acting under orders of the Board from exercising his powers
and functions under the Act.
3. Damaging any property belonging to the Board.
4. Failure to furnish information to an officer or any employee of the Board, which is
required by such officer or employee.
5. Failure to inform about the excess release of emissions than the standard set by the State
Board. Even an apprehension of the release of excess emissions should be informed to
the State Board.
6. Giving false statements to Board authorities when furnishing information.
7. Giving false information to the Board, for getting permission under Section 21 i.e.
permission for setting up industrial plants.

These are offences that shall be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to three
months with fine, which may extend to ten thousand rupees or both.

 Under Section 39, any order or direction which has been flouted, and for which there is
no punishment anywhere in the Act, shall be punishable with three months
imprisonment or fine of three thousand rupees or both. If failure continues, there shall
be a fine of an additional five thousand rupees every day.

7|P a ge
  Section 40 of this Act talks about offences by companies. If an offence is committed
by a company, every such person shall be deemed to be guilty, who is directly in charge
of the company, who is responsible to the company for the conduct of its business as
well as the company itself. He shall be punished according to the provisions of this Act.
However, where such an offence was committed without the knowledge of such a
person, or where he had made full efforts and due diligence to stop these offences, this
person shall not be held liable.
 Section 40(2) further states that where the offence was committed after taking the
consent of the director, manager, secretary or other officer or happened due to the
neglect of the aforesaid people, then they shall be deemed guilty and can be punished
according to the Act.
 Section 41 talks about offences committed by governmental departments. Where any
government department has committed an offence under this Act, then the head of that
department shall be liable to be proceeded and accordingly punished. However, if the
Head of Department had no knowledge of the committing of these offences, or had
practised due diligence to prevent these offences from happening, he shall not be held
liable.
 Furthermore, as provided under Section 41(2), if such Head of Department had
consented to, or neglected to prevent, the commission of these offences, then such
person shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly. 10

10
https://blog.ipleaders.in/handling-of-hazardous-substances-and-legal-provisions/#:~:text=As%20per%20Section%202
8|P a ge
APPEAL UNDER THE AIR (PREVENTION AND CONTROL) ACT, 1981
According to section 31 Appeal is if
1) Any person aggrieved by an order made by the State Board under this Act may, within
thirty days from the date on which the order is communicated to him, prefer an appeal
to such authority (hereinafter referred to as the Appellate Authority) as the State
Government may think fit to constitute: Provided that the Appellate Authority may
entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if such authority
is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal
in time.
2) The Appellate Authority shall consist of a single person or three persons as the State
Government may think fit to be appointed by the State Government.
3) The form and the manner in which an appeal may be preferred under sub-section (1),
the fees payable for such appeal and the procedure to be followed by the Appellate
Authority shall be such as may be prescribed.
4) On receipt of an appeal preferred under sub-section (1), the Appellate Authority shall,
after giving the appellant and the State Board an opportunity of being heard, dispose
of the appeal as expeditiously as possible. 11

11
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780750698993500195
9|P a ge
CASE LAWS

M.C. MEHTA V. UNION OF INDIA AIR 1997 SC 734 (TAJ TRAPEZIUM CASE)
Introduction:

 This case lies between M.C. Mehta and Anr V Union of India. It is popularly known as
Taj Trapezium case. The writ petition was filed by M.C. Mehta, along with the petition
a report was attached. This report was on “Environmental Impact of Mathura Refinery”
(Varadharajan Committee). It was published in the year 1978 by the Government of
India. In the Taj Trapezium zone (TTZ), the sources of pollution were indicated in the
reports of the experts.

Background of the Case:

 Taj is considered as one of the best Mughal architecture in India. The defined area of
10400 sq km was built around the Taj mahal to protect the monument from pollution.
Such an area was known as Taj Trapezium Zone. The Trapezium-shaped area around
the Taj Mahal covers 5 districts in the region of Agra. In 1983, it was declared as a
UNESCO World Heritage Site. M.C. Mehta was a public interest Lawyer who visited
Taj Mahal in the year 1984. He saw that the Taj Mahal’s Marble was turning yellow.
Due to widespread pollution by the nearby industries, the monument was a bit pitted as
well as a result of which he filed a petition in the Supreme Court.

Facts of the Case:

 It was stated by the petitioner that the reasons behind the monument's degradation were
the chemical industries, refinery, and the foundries. Various emissions of gases like
Sulphur- dioxide with oxygen led to damage of the monument. This mixture turned into
acid rain, due to which the moisture in the atmosphere was retained which resulted into
“Acid rain”. Such rains were harmful for the marbles which were laid on the Taj Mahal.
This was slowly damaging the monument. The damage was quite visible, as it turned
out to be a yellow pallor on the marbles. At some other places on the Taj Mahal, there
were brown and black spots as well; they were easily magnified with the Yellow spots.
 If the damage had not been considered seriously and immediately it would lead serious
danger to the monument. It was on its way of degradation due to the harmful effects of
the pollution. Some of the effective measures needed to be taken to save the Taj Mahal

10 | P a g e
 from disrupting its reputation internationally. The petitioner therefore requested the
court to take measures for the preservation of the monument. A report named
“Inventory and Assessment of Pollution Emission in and Around Agra-Mathura
Region'' was published by the Central Board for Prevention and Control of Water
Pollution. They declared some level of pollution via statistics, which resulted to be very
high. The report also stated some measures. According to report 2, thermal power
stations needed to be closed down. Along with that they needed to be replaced with
diesel in railway yards. The emissions of Sulphur dioxide needed to be cut down upto
50%.

Principles and Laws pertaining to this Case:

 The Precautionary Principle was taken into consideration. In this principle certain
environmental measures were taken by the state government and the statutory
authorities. According to this principle, anticipation, prevention and attack are the
causes of environmental degradation. In case of serious and irreversible damage, lack
of scientific certainty should not be considered a reason for postponing the measures to
prevent environmental degradation.
 The polluters pay principle was defined in the case of Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum
v Union of India. According to this principle, the liability for harm to the environment
extends not only towards compensation but also to restore the environmental
degradation.
 The three enactments were considered :The Water (prevention and Control of pollution)
Act, 1974 (the Water Act), the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 (the
Air Act) and the Environment protection Act, 1986 (the Environment Act). Article 21
of the constitution of India guarantees protection of life and personal liberty. Also,
Article 47, 48A and 51A(g) of the constitution state that raising the standard of public
health and protection of the natural environment.

Supreme Court's Observation and Judgement:

 Taj was moving towards its destruction and damage; such deterioration was well
acknowledged by the court. The court also keenly observed that such damage was not
only by the traditional causes but there were other various socio and economic factors.
 Different expert authorities submitted various reports stating the air pollutants
generated from industries have harmful effects on the marble of Taj Mahal. It is also
11 | P a g e
 affecting the people living in the Taj trapezium zone. The pollution in TTZ has to be
reduced. The court ordered that the industries which are not in the position to obtain
gas connections shall stop its functioning with the aid of coke/coal in TTZ and they
may have to relocate themselves. The applications for the grant of gas connections will
be finalised by the Gas Authority Of India Limited (GAIL). The court further stated
that 292 Industries shall change over the natural gas as an industrial fuel. The court also
gave certain rights and benefits to the workmen employed in these 292 Industries. The
workmen shall continue employment at the nen this way, the Court 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 Delhi.
 Similarly, in Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar 1991, it was held that the right to life
under Article 21 included the right to a healthy and safe environment, which in turn
included the right to pollution-free air and water for the full enjoyment of life. It was
held that municipalities and other governmental bodies had an obligation of taking
positive measures to ensure a healthy environment.12

12
https://lawcorner.in/taj-trapezium-case-m-c-mehta-v-union-of-india-1986/
12 | P a g e
ARJUN GOPAL V. UNION OF INDIA (CRACKER BAN CASE) 728/2015

The Supreme Court on November 11, 2016 passed an order in the case Arjun Gopal Vs. UoI
to grant interim relief in respect of fireworks. The Court, giving consideration to the hazardous
levels of air pollution in the region of NCR, issued interim directions and suspended the licence
to store and sell fireworks in the NCR. The Court directed the following to the Central
Government: Suspend all such licences as permit sale of fireworks, wholesale and retail within
the territory of NCR. The suspension shall remain in force till further orders of this Court. No
such licences shall be granted or renewed till further orders. In addition to the above, the Court
directed the CPCB to study and prepare a report on the harmful effects of the materials which
are currently being used in the manufacture of fire wow town and place where the industry is
shifted. The period between the closure of the industry in Agra and its restart at the place of
relocation shall be treated as active employment and the workmen shall be paid. 13

M.C. MEHTA V. UNION OF INDIA 1991 SCR (1) 866 (VEHICULAR POLLUTION
CASE)

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 48A and 51A 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.
Irks. The report was directed to be submitted within a period of three months (i.e from
11.11.2016) to this Court.14

13
Arjun Gopal Vs. UoI WP(C) 728/2015 order dated November 11, 2016
14
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1488667/
13 | P a g e
M.C MEHTA V. UNION OF INDIA (BAN OF PRIVATE CARS AND SUVS USING
DIESEL) No. 13029/ 1985

This case deals with the action plan suggested by the apex court and lifting ban on private cars
and suvs using diesel with 2000cc and above engine capacity and tackles the issue of air
pollution in Delhi and NCR. The Central Government on November 10, 2016 submitted a Plan
of Action in the form of a compilation which explained the cause of pollution and the possible
solutions for reducing the same. The Court was however dismayed upon finding out from
CPCB, that the number of Pollution Monitoring Stations in Delhi and their efficiency were not
sufficient. The CPCB also had no definite plan of action formulated for responding to different
levels of pollution at different points of time and at different locations in the city. The Court
therefore issued directions to the CPCB to evolve a definitive plan of action that would make
its response to different levels of pollution predictable and setting up of pollution monitoring
centres for appraising and grading of pollution levels and evolving different responses to
different levels of pollution. The matter was heard again on December 2, 2016 wherein the
final version of the Action Plan corresponding to the prevalent air pollution levels, as directed
by the court to be formulated earlier, was submitted by the Government before the Court. The
action plan categorises air pollution quality based on the PM level, proposes banning industries
use furnace oil and pet coke, banning of trucks in Delhi which are not carrying goods for Delhi,
temporary stoppage of construction, immediate implementation of the Delhi Government’s
promise on vacuum cleaners and increase in public transport including buses. A reply to certain
queries raised by the Court on 25.11.2016 was placed before the Court. The queries included:

1. What is the system of issuing Pollution under Control Certificates to vehicle owners
and who licences the Centre where such pollution checks are carried out and certificates
issued in the form of stickers.
2. How are the Centre, so licensed, monitored and by whom?
3. How many licences, given to such Centres, have been cancelled on account of the
Centre's not performing their duties satisfactorily.
4. What steps, if any, can be taken to check vehicular pollution randomly either through
the Transport Department or motor vehicle/traffic department concerned.

14 | P a g e
 5. Whether the pollution check Centres are computerised and whether data available to it
is uploaded on Net, if so, which is the agency that monitors the entire process.

The Court indicated that Ms. Sunita Narain should study these responses submitted by the
Government and submit a detailed report on the same, including suggestions on how the
pollution certification system can be strengthened.
The Court, in light of various submissions then directed as under:

 Further to the various steps undertaken by the CPCB for monitoring air pollution i.e.
upgrading central control rooms, expanding the monitoring stations, equipping the
control rooms adequately etc. The Court directed that the CPCB was granted six
months’ time to implement the proposed plan, and would have liberty to seek an
extension of so required.
 The Court accepted the action plan put forth and held that the only measure pending is
the statutory notification by the Government under Section 3 of the Environment
Protection Act.
 The Court directed that determination of the grade of pollution will be done by the
Environment Pollution Control Authority (EPCA). This decision was taken by the
Court as the CPCB is an authority under the Air Act, while the EPCA was set up under
a notification under the Environment Protection Act. The Court noted that since the
Central Government Notification would be under the Environment Protection Act, an
authority under the same Act should determine the grade of pollution. The CPCB has
powers under the Air Act and could pass appropriate instructions in line with the said
action plan.
 The Court directed that Ms. Sunita Narain will examine the issue and submit a response
on the same.15

15
M.C. Mehta Vs. Union of India, WP (Civil) No. 13029/ 1985 (upto Order dated December 2, 2016.)

15 | P a g e
OWN MOTION V. UNION OF INDIA 1346/2015

The High Court of Delhi in the case Court on Its Own Motion (Air Pollution in Delhi) Vs.
Union Of India & Ors passed its direction on the issue of Air Pollution on November 18, 2016.
The Court heard the issues of air pollution caused due to stubble burning/ biomass burning and
directed the Central Pollution Control Board to indicate after analysing the data scientifically
as to how much of the paddy straw per metric tonne which is burnt ends up as PM 2.5 and PM
10 as also other noxious gases and pollutants. The Court further directed that the State of Punjab
shall in the affidavit which is to be filed clearly indicate time lines with regard to the action
proposed to be taken so as to eliminate stubble burning/biomass burning completely in the next
year. Clear way-points shall be marked out in the affidavit and we shall monitor the same. The
Court also addressed the issue of the requirement for all taxis to be converted to CNG. The
Court noted that around 40000 taxis are still running on diesel in Delhi and the taxis running
in other States, that is, Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh are also mostly diesel
based. In this respect, the Court directed that a clear-cut plan of action should be furnished by
each of the States i.e. Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh. Each of the States were
directed to file affidavits clearly indicating the plans that have been drawn up or are being
drawn up to attain this objective. All these affidavits by the States, as also by the CPCB, shall
be filed within three weeks from today (i.e. 18.11.2016). The next issue raised was the burning
of garbage in sanitary landfill sites at Bhalswa, Gazipur and Okhla. The Court held that the
Municipal Corporations of Delhi are responsible for the landfill sites and they shall ensure that
all fires in these landfill sites are extinguished with immediate effect. Lastly the issue of
pollution contributed by road dust and construction was also addressed and the Court in this
respect directed all the agencies to remove all the rubble and debris left on and alongside roads
and all public areas such as markets etc. The matter was heard again on December 1, 2016
wherein the Court directed the respondents to file an affidavit indicating as to whether they
have carried out the directions of the Court. It was submitted by East Delhi Municipal
Corporation that an MoU has been signed with NHAI for utilising the Ghazipur landfill site for
the purpose of widening NH24.16

16
Court on Its Own Motion (Air Pollution in Delhi) Vs. Union Of India & Ors WP (C) 1346/2015 (upto Order dated
01.12.2016)

16 | P a g e
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

It is observed that the legislation to deal with air pollution is pretty strict and well formulated.
It encompasses the scientific aspects of managing air pollution with the actions of State and
Central bodies. The Pollution Control Boards are bestowed with a wide range of powers and
functions to check emission limits and take appropriate action. However, enforcement still
remains lax. An effective and successful emission control strategy should be holistic. It must
be a combination of successfully applied scientific ideas and technological advancements;
should support the economy and be supported by the public. These measures have the potential
to tackle pollution only if implemented successfully in the coming years. India is facing serious
issues of poor air quality in many urban areas. Apart from the much discussed megacities, like
Delhi, various reports suggest that several medium-scale cities are equally at the brunt of filthy
air. The ill-effects could impact human health in a negative way, also affecting the biodiversity,
other life forms, heritage, cultural buildings and even climate in the longer term. It is about
time that the government comes forward to support cities for the development of infrastructure
and treatment facilities.
The control strategies adopted to tackle air pollution must be sustainable in nature. For
example, the urban air pollution control strategy should depend mainly on sustainable means
of public transportation modes, such as BRTs, metros, trams, cycle lanes and well-connected
pedestrian facilities, which can further ensure minimum use of private vehicles, thereby
reducing air pollution levels. People must be motivated to opt for an efficient public transport
system instead of relying on private vehicles. Similarly, some strict laws must be enforced,
such as emission trading and congestion pricing, which have the potential to reduce emissions
drastically. Apart from these, the use of alternate fuels and e-cars, e-bikes and hybrid vehicle
types must be promoted by the government. All these measures could reduce city emissions
significantly.
The residents of rural areas are seldom aware of the harmful effects of air-borne pollutants and
their consequences to human health. Public awareness programmes should be initiated by the
government in every city, both rural and urban, highlighting the importance of managing air
pollution at source and the various control measures that could be adopted to reduce pollutant
emissions. Such initiatives could significantly reduce the activities, such as open burning of
wastes, crop burning, use of biomass as a fuel for cooking and burning of plastic and rubber
materials during winters. A holistic approach incorporating all of the mentioned measures

17 | P a g e
could be beneficial to attain cleaner air quality in Indian cities and guarantee a healthier place
to inhabit.
In this context, the NCAP launched by the Government of India appears to be a timely
intervention. It is based on a long-term, time-bound, national-level strategy to tackle air
pollution in a comprehensive manner with targets to achieve 20–30% reduction in particulate
matter (PM) concentrations by 2024, keeping 2017 as the base year for the comparison of
concentration levels. A total of 122 non-attainment cities have been identified across the
country based on the 'Air Quality' data obtained for the period 2014–2018 under NCAP. The
city-specific action plans are being prepared which, inter-alia, include measures for
strengthening the monitoring network, developing emission inventories, carrying out source
apportionment studies, reducing vehicular/industrial emissions, and generating public
awareness, among others. It is expected that such initiatives by the central and state
governments along with the participation of local bodies and other stakeholders comprising
academia, research institutions, and public interest groups would result in ensuring better air
quality in India.

18 | P a g e
WEBLIOGRAPHY AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. https://byjus.com/free-ias-prep/air-prevention-and-control-of-pollution-act-1981/
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_(Prevention_and_Control_of_Pollution)_Act
3. https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-6035-air-prevention-and-control-of-
pollution-act-
1981.html#:~:text=Under%20Section%2039%2C%20any%20order,five%20thousand
%20rupees%20every%20day
4. https://blog.ipleaders.in/environment-legislation-in-india/#Introduction
5. https://www.indiacode.nic.in/handle/123456789/1389?sam_handle=123456789/1362
6. https://www.clearias.com/environmental-laws-india/
7. https://egyankosh.ac.in/bitstream/123456789/60186/1/The%20Air%20%28Prevention
%20and%20Control%20of%20Pollution%29%20Act%201981.pdf
8. Crime in India 2015 Statistics, National Crime Records Bureau, Ministry of Home
Affairs
9. https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A1981-14.pdf
10. https://blog.ipleaders.in/handling-of-hazardous-substances-and-legal-
provisions/#:~:text=As%20per%20Section%202
11. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780750698993500195
12. The Cost of Air Pollution: Strengthening the Economic Case for Action, the World
Bank and Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation University of Washington,
Seattle, 2016.
13. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/0-306-48208-8_10
14. https://blogs.edf.org/texascleanairmatters/2010/12/21/air-pollution-new-studies-same-
conclusions/
CASE LAWS
 M.C. MEHTA V. UNION OF INDIA AIR 1997 SC 734
 ARJUN GOPAL V. UNION OF INDIA 728/2015
 M.C. MEHTA V. UNION OF INDIA 1991 SCR (1) 866
 M.C MEHTA V. UNION OF INDIA (BAN OF PRIVATE CARS AND SUVS USING
DIESEL) No. 13029/ 1985
 OWN MOTION V. UNION OF INDIA 1346/2015

19 | P a g e