Open Access Research Article
EVALUATION OF THE INDIAN AIR POLLUTION CONTROL LAWS
Published Paper
Article Details
EVALUATION OF THE INDIAN AIR
POLLUTION CONTROL LAWS
Authored By
- C Akash Roy
Roll No.
20191BCL0015
Semester:
9th
Name Of The
Program: 5 Year (B.Com ., Llb Hons.)
Name Of The
Faculty Member: Aprajita Verma
Presidency
University, Bengaluru, India
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would
like to express my sincere gratitude to my respected research methodology
teacher Prof. Aprajita Verma for giving me the opportunity to work on the
research project “Evaluation of Indian Air Pollution Control Act”. I have tried
to collect information about the research project in various possible ways to
get a clear idea about the topic of this research
|
CASE LAW
|
CITATION
|
|
1. Taj
Trapezium Case
|
30 December, 1996
|
|
2. M.C. Mehta v. UOI
|
1991 SCR (1) 866
|
|
3. Shri Ram Fertilizer’s case
|
1987 AIR 1086
|
|
4. Curious Case of Delhi
|
|
|
5. Bhopal Gas Tragedy Case
|
1990 AIR 273
|
SYNOPSIS :
The research paper assesses the effectiveness and
implementation of India’s air pollution control law. It delves into the
regulatory framework, its enforcement, and the impact on mitigating air
pollution. The study likely examines challenges, loopholes, and potential
recommendations for better policy execution to address India’s complex air
quality issues.
To assess the
effectiveness of India’s pollution control system, we have examined the
shortcomings of two relevant laws and shown that even some seemingly flawless
laws have lost their validity due to non-implementation. It has become a truism
today that there is a lack of political will. If India’s Prime Minister had decided
to make pollution control a top priority, he would have had access to trained
technicians, monitoring equipment, and enforcement resources. The Seventh Five
Year Plan8 6 (1985-1990) could have reflected these new priorities by
empowering the Pollution Control Board with enforcement powers and enacting
simple legislation with penalties severe enough to deter evasion and enforce
the law.
RESEARCH QUESTION:
1.
is the air pollution law working effectively?
OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
1. critically
examine the concept of air pollution and the legislation governing its control
2.
Learn from history how air pollution has evolved.
SCOPE OF THE STUDY:
The scope of the study was limited to a review of the concept
of air pollution legislation and comparison with other countries.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY:
Understand the concept of air pollution and how air pollution
is legislated.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:
NATURE OF THE STUDY: The research conducted is doctrinal
in nature and is a combination of analytical, descriptive and explanatory
methods.
LITERATURE REVIEW:
1.
India’s
40-year old law to combat air pollution languishes as the crisis intensifies,
Nihar Gokhale, Mongabay, November,2020
2. Ultimately,
an administrative initiative of this kind arises as a result of public interest
and perceived need. It is much easier for citizens to recognize such interest
and need when they are hungry for reform. In the aftermath of the Bhopal
accident, with widespread awareness of environmental damage and a growing demand
for better regulation, this seems an ideal time to improve India's pollution
control system. People's memories are short and their calls for environmental
improvements tend to be ad hoc. Unless urgent action is taken, it could be
years before India's pollution control system is strengthened and another
disaster could occur.
3.
C.M.
Abrahan & Armin Rosencranz, An Evaluation of Pollution Control Legislation
In India, 11 Columbia Journal of Emvironmental Law
Indeed, there are
underutilized provisions in India's Criminal Code, Code of Criminal Procedure
and Code of Civil Procedure that can be used to mitigate the effects of
pollution; Section 91 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as amended in 1976, also
facilitates civil actions for exceeding permissible pollution levels. These are
just some of the avenues that proactive lawyers and environmental groups can
pursue to supplement the currently ineffective anti-pollution regime and
demonstrate to polluters that the public is willing to protect India's air and water
resources by any means necessary.
AN EVALUATION OF THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
LAW IN INDIA
INTRODUCTION:
Almost 40 years ago, India enacted a law to combat air pollution.
However, now that an air pollution emergency has re-emerged in northern India, this
all-but-forgotten law is facing another year of reckoning.
The Air Pollution Control Act, 1981 was enacted to fulfill India's
commitments made at the UN Conference on Environment in 1972 to "preserve
air quality and prevent air pollution". The Act gave state and central
governments broad powers to take measures to improve air quality, implement
pollution control measures, shut down unscrupulous industries and send
polluters to jail.
However, despite Indian cities ranking higher in global air pollution
rankings (latest State of the World's Air Quality 2020 report), the importance
of the Act has been declining over the years. Very few cases have been filed
under the Air Protection Act in the past few years, despite the fact that the
northern states of India experience the worst air pollution every winter.
Measures such as the Phased Response Plan and the Even-No Scheme rely on other
laws and regulations, some of which have nothing to do with the environment[1].
This law is commonly referred to as "toothless". When pollution
spikes during winter, MPs, lawyers and activists demand that the law be amended
or replaced with a new one. This year, it is the turn of India's Attorney
General to make a similar commitment. On October 28, the Indian government passed
the Metropolitan and Adjacent Areas Air Quality Management Commission
Ordinance, 2020, which establishes a committee to coordinate air pollution
control measures among the state governments of Delhi, Haryana, Punjab,
Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh.
The Water Act of 1974 was India's first pollution control law and
established monitoring bodies in each state and at the center. The Air Act
transformed these bodies into Pollution Control Boards, which were given wide
powers over industrial activities.
They conduct searches and seizures and take samples. They can also order
the closure of businesses or cut off electricity and water.
For example, no enterprise can be
established without the authorization of these committees. A separate permit is
required to start operations, and another permit is required if the production
process is changed. Permits include orders to install pollution control
equipment, install pollution monitors, and post the latest pollution levels on
a notice board. The Pollution Control Board can also initiate criminal
proceedings against owners and employees of businesses that pollute the air or
water.
The law covers industrial units and other point sources of pollution that
do not require environmental clearance under the EIA notification, such as
small and medium enterprises," Shibani Ghosh, an environmental lawyer and
research fellow at the Centre for Policy Studies, who authored a note on the
liability system under the law, told Mongabay-India.
BACKGROUND OF THE AIR POLLUTION:
India, like most least developed countries, has a primitive and largely
ineffective pollution control system to deal with its enormous problems. Scarce
investment funds are usually spent on building industrial plants that can be
built quickly and cheaply, with little attention paid to pollution control
standards and equipment. India's pollution control laws are relatively weak and
enforcement is haphazard[2].
Even tragedies
such as the chemical explosion at the Union Carbide pesticide plant in Bhopal
in December 1984, which resulted in over 2,000 deaths and countless
consequences, are unsettling. It is therefore unlikely that India will
establish an OSHA-like regulatory agency or enact strong legislation to
regulate the use and disposal of hazardous substances. Identifying possible
responses requires some understanding of the sources of legal and political
power in the Indian system.
The
Atmospheric Act was enacted during the heyday of environmental regulation in
India: first under Indira Gandhi and then under her son Rajiv Gandhi, the
central government enacted the Wildlife Protection Act of 1972, the Water
(Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act of 1974, the Forest Conservation Act
of 1980, and in 1986, the Environment (Protection) Act was enacted. These laws
were enacted in fulfillment of the commitments made by Indira Gandhi in her
famous speech linking poverty and pollution at the landmark United Nations
Conference on the Human Environment held in Stockholm in 1972. Sweden was the
first country to propose that the UN hold a global conference to discuss and
prevent environmental pollution and degradation of natural resources. As a
result, General Assembly Resolution 2398 was adopted and the UN Conference on
the Human Environment was held in Stockholm in June 1972. At this conference,
it was decided that countries should take measures to protect their natural
resources (including the atmosphere). Therefore, the Government of India
enacted special laws to protect natural resources under Article 253 of the
Constitution and the law enacted to protect the atmosphere was the Air Quality
(Prevention and Control of Air Pollution) Act, 1981 (Air Quality (Prevention
and Control of Air Pollution) Act, 1981).
The preamble to the Act states that it is intended for the prevention,
control and abatement of air pollution and that the Commission established
under the Act is responsible for carrying out its objectives.
PROSPECTIVE IMPACT
OF INDIA’S POLLUTION
CONTROL LAWS:
From the text of the Water Quality Act and the Air Quality Act, it
appears that India has a workable regulatory strategy to address both water and
air pollution. However, the Act is neither enforceable nor effective, and the
complex administrative structures it creates are understaffed and perform only
routine administrative tasks: (a) administration of agreements; (b) structure
of each pollution control board; (c) opportunities for public participation;
(d) availability of judicial remedies; and (e) setting standards. Each of these
five deficiencies is discussed below.
A. Consent Administration:
Prevention and control of water
pollution is accomplished through "consent" or permit procedures.
Applications
for the creation of new or modification of existing effluents, as well as for
new discharges of sewage effluents into watercourses, must be submitted to the
Control Board.29 Similar provisions are included in the Atmospheric Air
Protection Act for new stationary emission sources specified in the annex to
the Atmospheric Air Protection Act. Under these two laws, the Control Board can
amend or supplement these conditions at any time, as well as withdraw
consent.30 These supposedly broad powers have never been used and have little
to do with the actual functions of the Control Board.
B. Constitution of the Boards:
The
Water Act and the Air Act contain detailed provisions for the establishment of
central and state commissions. A detailed analysis of the composition, powers
and functions of these statutory bodies shows that they are not equipped to
ensure implementation of adequate pollution control measures. Of the 7-17
members of each commission, including the Central Commission, only two - the
Chairman and the Secretary - are required to have experience in the field of
environment. No qualification criteria have been laid down for the rest of the
nominees. The government can nominate five senior civil servants. In practice,
most government-appointed officials are heads of institutions already
overburdened with other responsibilities.
This hinders the efficiency and continuity of the council's work. The
inefficiency of the councils is further compounded by the fact that all those
water boards that used to be state boards are now also serving as air pollution
boards. The state pollution commissions are understaffed and lack the capacity
and resources to perform the various functions of the Water Act, let alone the
Air Act. The Kerala State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB), one of the most
active in India, has 12 professional staff, most of whom are involved in record
keeping. None of them serve as controllers, inspectors or legal advisors. The
Commission's annual budget barely covers the salaries of its staff and the
travel expenses of the Chairman and Secretary General.
C. Public Participation:
Decision making in pollution control in India can be categorized into
three main stages. Namely, the investigation stage, the permit stage and the
appeal stage against administrative decisions and permit conditions passed by
the State Commission. Public Participation
At each of these three stages, public participation can be invaluable.
Since air and water pollution significantly affects the public, it makes sense
that they should be given the opportunity to be heard at all stages of
pollution control decision-making. Section 25(3) of the Water Resources Act
empowers the State Commission to "make such inquiries as it considers
necessary in relation to applications for consent and to follow such procedures
as may be prescribed in making such inquiries". Similar provisions are
contained in the Civil Aviation Act. In practice, the Council merely sends an
officer to visit the premises of a consent applicant to verify the information
provided by the applicant. The officer is not authorized to carry out public
consultation.
D. Obstacles to Judicial recourse:
As noted, India's pollution control laws do not confer effective
enforcement powers. Any person who violates permit conditions is criminally
liable, but the state commission cannot impose fines or other penalties on its
own. The state commission must initiate prosecution with the assistance of a
state (public) prosecutor. Such prosecutions are costly, uncertain,
time-consuming, and rarely result in a conviction.
E. Setting of Standards:
For air and water quality standards
to be enforceable in court, they must be clearly and unambiguously stated.
Since standard setting involves broad administrative discretion, both laws are
expected to have detailed procedural requirements. Under the Water Quality Act,
the State Commission is the standard-setting body: "No person shall
knowingly cause or permit the discharge of poisonous, noxious, or polluting
substances determined in accordance with standards established by the State
Commission." The actual standards in a particular area depend on the
number and type of industries, their location, and the amount of water in the
river. However, Sections 24-26 of the Water Act provide little guidance to the
Commission in setting appropriate standards. The Air Act has no similar
provisions for various special standards.
SOURCES OF AIR POLLUTION:
Among the pollutants, PM2.5 exceeds the standards the most, followed by
PM10, NO2, CO and ozone. The only pollutant that meets national standards is
SO2. These pollutants come from a variety of sources and in varying proportions[3].
These include vehicle exhaust, heavy industry including power generation,
small-scale industry including brick kilns, suspended dust on roads from
vehicle traffic and construction activities, outdoor burning of waste, burning
of various fuels for cooking, lighting and heating, and on-site power
generation using diesel generators. In addition, there is seasonal exposure to
dust storms, forest fires, forest fires during harvesting season and sea salt
in coastal areas. In urban India, most of the air pollution is due to
combustion of diesel, petrol, gas, coal, biomass, waste and suspended dust,
which occurs throughout the year.
1.
burning of fossil fuels
2.
industrial emissions
3.
indoor air pollution
4.
forest fires
5.
microbial decomposition processes
6.
transportation
7.
open burning of waste
8.
construction and demolition of buildings
9.
agricultural activities
10. use
of chemical and synthetic products
Air pollution
is generally caused by the burning of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and
gasoline. Air pollution results from the release of carbon monoxide and toxic
pollutants into the atmosphere. The increase in transportation leads to an
increase in the amount of pollutants in the air, resulting in air pollution in
our country.
ACT, 1981:
The purpose of the Air Quality Act 1981 is to maintain air quality and
prevent air pollution. Chapter 3 of the Act deals with the powers and functions
of the Commission. There are two Commissions - the Central Commission and the
State Commissions. To advise the Government on all matters relating to the
improvement of air quality, prevention, control and abatement of air pollution;
to plan and implement programs for prevention, control and abatement of air
pollution; to collect, compile and analyze information. The principal functions
of these authorities are to publish, prepare guidelines, standards and
handbooks for the prevention, control and abatement of air pollution; to
establish air quality standards; to inspect control points, industrial plants
and manufacturing processes at reasonable times; to inspect and issue
directions by order to such plants. Where necessary, they may inspect air
pollution control zones, assess the air quality in such zones and take measures
to prevent, control and reduce air pollution. The Central Commission and the
State Committees shall work in cooperation with each other. While the Central
Commission works at the national level, the state committees work within the
state. Similarly, Chapter 4 deals with prevention and control of air pollution.
The State Government in consultation with the State Commission may declare any
area or areas within the State as an air pollution control zone or zones for
the purposes of this Act and may also modify the air pollution control zones by
enlargement or reduction, create one or more existing air pollution control
zones or parts of air pollution control zones or may declare a new air
pollution control zone which may merge one or more existing air pollution
control zones or parts thereof.
SECTION-2 OF THE AIR (prevention and control of pollution), ACT, 1981:
Section-2(a):
“air pollutant” means any solid, liquid or gaseous substance 2 [(including noise)] present in
the atmosphere in such concentration as may be or tend to be injurious
to human beings or other living creatures or plants or property or environment;
Section-2(b):
“Air pollution” means the presence
in the atmosphere of any air pollutant
POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF THE POLLUTION
CONTROL BOARDS:
POWERS:
1.
Power to declare Air Pollution Zones Under Section 19
of the Act, the State Government, after consultation with the State Commission,
may declare certain areas of the State as 'Air Pollution Zones'. The State
Government may also order the expansion or contraction of an air pollution zone
or the amalgamation of one or more zones to form a new air pollution zone or
part thereof.
2.
Power to impose restrictions to ensure emission norms
of motor vehicles: section 20 provides that the State Government, after
consultation with the State Commission, may issue directions to the authority
responsible for registration of motor vehicles under the Motor Vehicles Act,
1939 and the said authority shall be bound to comply with such directions. This
is to ensure compliance of emission norms specified in section 17(1)(g).
3.
Restrictions on use of certain industrial undertakings
Article 21 deals with the establishment of industrial undertakings subject to
the consent of the concerned State Commission. Article 21 regulates the
procedure for submitting an application to the State Commission, following
which a decision is made and the applicant is notified of the grant or refusal
of authorization to establish an enterprise. It also specifies the conditions
for the establishment of an enterprise.
4.
Persons operating industries etc. are not allowed to
emit pollutants into the atmosphere in excess of the norms prescribed by the
State Commission: article 22 states that persons operating industries are not
allowed to emit pollutants into the atmosphere in excess of the norms
prescribed by the State Commission.
5.
Under Article 22A, if the State Commission finds that
a person operating an industrial establishment in an air pollution zone is
emitting excessive emissions, it may approach the court to restrain that person
from emitting air pollution. 5. may.
6.
informing the State Commission and other authorities
Article 23 stipulates that if, as a result of an accident or unforeseen
circumstances, emissions exceed the prescribed limits, the person operating an
industrial enterprise shall inform the State Commission or other relevant
authorities and take remedial measures as soon as possible.
7.
Authority to enter and inspect Persons authorized by
the State Commission under section 24 shall have the right to enter any place
to perform the duties assigned to them. The person in charge of these
installations, plants, entries, etc., shall assist the State Commissioners in
the performance of their duties. Failure to do so shall be an offense.
8.
Power to obtain information Section 25 provides that
the State Commission or any person authorized by it shall have power to seek
information from any person operating such plant or equipment as to the type
and emission of air pollutants produced by such plant or equipment. They shall
also conduct inspections to verify this information.
FUNCTIONS:
- The Board
may work for the prevention, reduction and control of air pollution in the
country and advise the Central Government.
- Plan and
implement national programs for prevention, control and abatement of air
pollution.
-
Coordinate the activities of the states and resolve disputes arising between
them.
- State
Commissions provide technical assistance to their committees and conduct
research and studies on air pollution problems.
- State
commissions plan and implement comprehensive programs to prevent, control and
reduce air pollution. They also advise state governments on these matters.
- The State
Commission collects and disseminates information on air pollution. It organizes
training and awareness programs for prevention, control and abatement of air
pollution.
- The Air
Pollution Control Board inspects air pollution control installations,
industrial units and manufacturing processes at appropriate times and issues
directions to the responsible persons to control air pollution.
PENALTIES:
Under section 37, any
person who fails to comply with the directions contained in sections 21, 22 and
31A is liable to imprisonment for a term of one year and six months. This
period may be extended to six years and if the provisions of the above sections
are still not complied with, a daily fine of R5 000 may be imposed.
Section 38 provides penalties for certain acts. Such acts include.
1.
destroying, defacing, damaging or removing etc. any
post, post, stake or bollard fixed in the ground under the authority of the
council
2.
obstructing a person acting under the authority of the
board in the exercise of his powers or duties under the Act
3.
causing damage to the property of the board; or
4.
failing to provide information required by an officer
or employee of the Board to such officer or employee
5.
failing to report any excess emissions in excess of
thresholds established by the State Board. 5. is required to report to the
State Board even if there are concerns about excess emissions.
6.
makes false statements to the State Board when
providing information to the State Board bodies
7.
providing false information to the Council in order to
obtain a permit under Article 21, i.e. a permit to install an industrial
installation.
These
offenses are punishable by imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months,
a fine not exceeding R10 000 or both.
ENVIRONMETAL PROTECTION ACT, 1986:
The
Environment Protection Act was enacted in 1986. Prior to the enactment of this
Act, India had a Department of Environment established in 1980, which became
the Ministry of Environment and Forests in 1985. Similarly, the Air (Prevention
and Control of Pollution) Act was enacted in 1981. The purpose of this Act is
to take appropriate measures for the protection and improvement of the
environment and prevention of hazards.
The purpose
of this Act is to take appropriate measures for the protection and improvement
of the environment and to prevent hazards to human beings and other living
beings, plants and property. The Act defines 'environmental pollution' as the
presence of environmental pollutants in the environment and 'environmental
pollutant' as any solid, liquid or gaseous substance present in concentrations
which are or may be harmful to the environment.[4]
The Central Government shall maintain and improve the quality of the
environment and prevent and control environmental pollution as it deems
necessary. It shall have the power to take all measures it considers necessary
to maintain and improve the quality of the environment and to prevent and
control pollution of the environment, to prohibit and restrict the handling of
hazardous substances in various areas, to prohibit and restrict the location of
industries and the carrying out of processes and operations in various areas,
to conduct and sponsor research and study of pollution problems, to protect the
prevention of accidents which may cause pollution of the environment, and to
take In addition, Chapter 3 describes methods of preventing, controlling, and
remediating environmental pollution. This chapter prohibits any person from
discharging or authorizing the discharge of pollutants into the environment in
excess of established standards, or handling or authorizing the handling of
special hazardous substances in accordance with established procedures and in
compliance with safety measures, when carrying out an industrial activity or
process. Any person who fails to comply or commits an offense is liable to
imprisonment for five years or a fine of up to R1, or both, and in the case of
non-compliance or a continuing offense, upon conviction of the first
non-compliance or continuing offense, is liable to a fine of up to R5 000 per
day. Finally, if the offense continues for more than one year from the date of
conviction, it is punishable by imprisonment for a maximum of seven years.
In
addition, if a company commits an offence under this Act, every person who, at
the time of the commission of the offence, was directly in charge of the
company and responsible to it for the conduct of its affairs, including
directors, managers, secretaries and other officers of the company, as well as
the company itself, shall be deemed guilty of the offence and shall be
prosecuted and punished accordingly The company shall be prosecuted and
punished accordingly.
LANMARK JUDGEMENTS:
M.C. MEHTA v. UNION OF INDIA (Taj Trapezium Case)
Huge
numbers of industries were around Taj Mahal. The main responsible factors for
polluting the ambient air around Taj Mahal are industrial/refinery emissions,
brick-kilns, vehicular traffic and generator-sets. The petition states that the
color of marble has converted from whitish to yellowish and blackish. On 30th
of December 1996 and the bench consisted of Justice
Kuldip Singh and Justice Faizan Uddin gave the final verdict in this case. Taj
Mahal, which is one of the world heritage sites as declared by UNESCO, has been
source of revenue to the country because it has capacity to attract tourist
throughout the world. The court was of the view that The Taj Mahal is a
masterpiece and has international reputation. It is also an important source of
revenue to the country because of the huge tourist attraction it commanded. So,
there won’t be compromise regarding its beauty. The industries were supposed to
relocate far from Taj Trapezium.
Principles laid down in this case are-
Sustainable development– Development of industry is essential for economy
but at the same time environment has to be protected. Hence, the object behind
this litigation is to stop the pollution.
Precautionary principle– the pollution created as an outcome of
development so the state must
anticipate, prevent and attack the harm caused to the environment.
Polluter pays principle– the court interpreted the principle in order to
mean that the absolute liability to harm the environment is not only to compensate
the victims of pollution but also for restoring the cost of environmental
degradation.
M.C. MEHTA v. UNION OF INDIA[5]
Ø In the present case, Mr. M.K. Mehta
has filed a writ petition in connection with air pollution by vehicle exhaust
fumes. He urged the court to pass appropriate orders to prevent pollution.
Ø The Court held that protection of
environment is an express principle of State policy and a duty of the State
enshrined in Articles 48A and 51A of the Constitution. The Supreme Court held
that the right to a healthy environment is a fundamental human right which
includes the right to clean air under Article 21 of the Constitution. The court
thus extended the scope of Article 21 to include the right to a healthy
environment and clean air as a fundamental human right.
Ø This paved the way for the supply of
unleaded petrol in Delhi and the introduction of compressed natural gas (CNG).
The court also assisted in setting up a committee to find a lasting solution to
the problem of air pollution in Delhi as well as the litigation.
Ø Similarly, in Subhash Kumar v State
of Bihar[6] it was held that the
right to life under Article 21 includes the right to a healthy and safe
environment. Municipalities and other public authorities have a duty to take
positive measures to ensure a healthy environment.
M.C. MEHTA v. UNION OF INDIA[7] (Shri Ram Fertilizer’s case)
Late in the
evening of February 3, 1984, a toxic gas leak occurred at a Union Carbide
Corporation plant in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh. The accident, dubbed "the
world's worst industrial disaster," killed 2,260 people and seriously
injured about 60 million people and caused various complications. On December 4
and 6, 1985, while the case was pending in the Supreme Court, another gas
accident occurred at Shri Ram Huz and Fertilizer Industries Ltd. in Delhi. Two
advocates died, several persons were injured and M.K. Mehta, as the principal
practicing advocate in the Supreme Court, filed a public interest litigation.
Judicial Petition under Article 32 of
the Constitution Following the major gas disaster in Bhopal a year ago, the
Supreme Court adopted new rules on strict liability.
The court laid down the following
principles Shri Ram Foods had to deposit $20 million with the court as security
for compensation to the victims. A green belt of 1-5 km width should be created
around such industries. The court directed the central government to set up an
environmental court consisting of one judge and two experts to assist the judge
in hearing environmental cases. In line with this recommendation, the
Government of India enacted the National Environment Courts Act, 1955 to deal
with pollution cases.
CURIOUS CASE OF
DELHI:
The Indian
government has declared a state of emergency and temporarily closed
construction sites, schools and coal-fired power plants in Delhi due to severe
air pollution from toxic substances. Delhi-based non-governmental organization
Center for Science and Environment announced that the Indian capital has
recorded the worst air pollution in 17 years.
The Delhi
government has also directed farmers not to burn agricultural waste. The Delhi
government is preparing to reintroduce a temporary system under which car
traffic is allowed only on even or odd days, depending on the last digit of the
registration number. The number of patients with respiratory diseases in city
hospitals is rising: in 2012, 159 out of every 100,000 people died from
respiratory diseases, according to the World Health Organization (WHO), making
India the country with the highest mortality rate in the world.
Ø Air
pollution in Delhi has been a serious problem for many years, but came into the
spotlight in the 1990s with the enactment of the Pollution Prevention Act of
1981, the establishment of the Pollution Control Board, and the enactment of
additional environmental protection laws.
Ø In 1996,
the Supreme Court issued a special order requiring the Delhi government to
submit an action plan to ensure clean air; a lawsuit filed by M.K. Mehta and
public outcry over the state of the air further exacerbated the problem. The
Environmental Pollution Prevention and Control Agency (EPCA) was set up along
with the National Clean Air Program (NCAP).
Ø Based on
the EPCA report, the Supreme Court issued an order banning the use of
compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles. This was a major success.
Ø However,
over the years, the number of vehicles has increased from 4.24 million in 2004
to over 10.8 million in March 2018, and there has been an increase in burning
of stock and construction activities (many of which are illegal).
Ø Over the
years, monitoring stations have been set up across Delhi to measure particulate
matter in the air, measures such as the even-number scheme and Supreme Court
orders banning the use of clappers and construction work have been implemented,
while public awareness and efforts have steadily increased.
Ø In 2016,
after heavy smog wreaked havoc in Delhi, the Supreme Court again asked the
state government to come up with a plan to combat such episodes of air
pollution. This plan came to be known as the Gradual Response Action Plan
(GRAP).
Ø Under this
plan, through monitoring and measurement of air quality in Delhi, areas of high
pollution are identified, problems in these areas are identified and local
action is devised.
Ø Undoubtedly,
Delhi suffers from an air crisis every year. It must be realized that it is
caused due to a number of factors that require massive action.
BHOPAL DISASTER CASE[8]:
The worst industrial accident in history occurred on December 3, 1984.
About 40 tons of methyl isocyanate (MIC) gas mixed with other toxic gases at a
chemical plant owned and operated by Union Carbide (India) Ltd. The accident
killed at least 3,800 people and injured several others. As a result of the
accident, the victims suffered from burning in the throat and eyes and nausea
as the gas was low to the ground. People exposed to toxic gases still have
children born 30 years later with physical and mental disabilities.
Union Carbide paid $470 million to the Indian Union to fully settle all
claims, rights and liabilities related to the Bhopal gas incident. The Supreme
Court awarded Union Carbide compensation on the basis of strict liability. This
is a comparatively small amount when compared to the crimes that have long term
consequences on human existence in this place. Even after this disaster, India
continued to undergo rapid industrialization. Despite some positive changes in
government policies and the behavior of some industries, in 1990.
significant environmental hazards associated with rapid and unregulated
industrial growth remain. Widespread environmental degradation continues to
adversely affect human health throughout India.
CONCLUSION:
The
concept of sustainable development arose from challenging the concept of rapid
development. For example, if someone cuts down a tree, two or more trees should
be planted. The concept of sustainable development was born out of the idea of
protecting the environment. Sustainable development should be done in such a
way that it is enough for a long time and future generations are not involved
in the problem. However, in India, the situation is the opposite. The pace of
development is very high. But at the same time it is not possible to maintain
clean air. There are laws, precedents, regulatory bodies, but the air quality
situation continues to deteriorate. Many people are dying of respiratory
diseases and lung cancer. Urban areas, especially those with large populations
where people come from different parts of India in search of amenities, are
very polluted. The average life expectancy of people in India may become less
than at present.
Although
the Environment Protection Act, 1986 and the Air Pollution Control Act, 1981
provide for preventive measures, regulatory commissions, fines and
compensation, the precedents set in the Bhopal disaster case and MC Meheta v
Union of India show that air pollution is not decreasing but increasing. The
situation is not only worsening but also getting worse. Thirty years have
passed since the enactment of the above-mentioned laws and there has been no
improvement in the air quality and the environment in general. From this point
of view, it is clear where the problem lies - in the law itself or in its
implementation. And the problem lies in both the law and its implementation.
The
law overwhelmingly gives the Commission discretionary authority to plan and
conduct surveys and studies. In particular, it fails to address issues such as
removing old cars, landscaping roadsides, dust control, and stopping waste
incineration. Therefore, officials are silent and passive. That's why officials
are silent and passive. If the law was clear on every issue, they would be
forced to take action against such practices.
Similarly,
if the authorities had planned to locate industrial zones away from human
settlements, world heritage sites and cities, the problems would not have
arisen. Due to lack of planning, first the industry pollutes the environment,
then a legal action is filed, e.g. MC Mehta v Union of India, and the court
orders the relocation of the industry. Here there seems to be a problem with
its implementation. Thus, if the air is not clean, the right to life of the
citizens will be seriously violated.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
JOURNALS:
3.
India’s 40-year old law to combat air pollution languishes as the crisis
intensifies, Nihar Gokhale,
Mongabay, November,2020
4. C.M. Abrahan
& Armin Rosencranz, An Evaluation of Pollution Control
Legislation In India, 11 Columbia Journal of
Emvironmental Law
5. Air Pollution
in Indian Cities:
Understanding the causes
and the knowledge gaps, Sarath
Guttikunda, Centre for policy Research, December, 2017
ONLINE SOURCES:
[1] India’s 40-year old law to combat
air pollution languishes as the crisis intensifies, Nihar Gokhale, Mongabay, November,2020.https://india.mongabay.com/2020/11/indias-40-year-old-law-to-combat-air-pollution- languishes-as-the-crisis-intensifies/
[2] C.M. Abrahan & Armin
Rosencranz, An Evaluation of Pollution Control Legislation In India, 11
Columbia Journal of Emvironmental Law
101, 101-118, 1986
[3] Air Pollution in Indian Cities:
Understanding the causes and the knowledge gaps, Sarath Guttikunda, Centre for policy Research, December, 2017 https://www.cprindia.org/news/air-pollution-indian-cities-understanding- causes-and-knowledge-gaps
[5] 1991 SCR (1) 866
[6] 1991 AIR 420
[7] 1987 AIR 1086
Article Information
EVALUATION OF THE INDIAN AIR POLLUTION CONTROL LAWS
Authors: C Akash Roy
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2023/11/17
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.