8th Semester-Down Group-UILS

ENVIRONMENT LAW PROJECT REPORT
ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: ANALYSING THE

MAJOR INDIAN STATUTES.
Only after the last tree has been cut down. Only after
the last river has been poisoned. Only after the last
fish has been caught. Only then will you find that
money cannot be eaten.
Cree Indian Prophecy
Compiled by:
Naina Khanna (64/10)
Submitted to:
Ms. Sabina Salim
Sunakshi Sharma (59/10)

Salina Chalana (57/10)
Ishrat Phoolka (89/10)
Date of Submission: 7th April, 2014
CONTENT TABLE
CHAPTER NO.
TOPIC
SUBMISSION BY
Water Pollution and The Law in India
Naina Khanna
With Reference to The Water

(Prevention and Control of Pollution)
Act, 1974
2
Comparative Analysis of Air and Water
Naina & Sunakshi
Act
3
Air Pollution And The Law In India
Sunakshi Sharma
With Reference To The Air (Prevention

And Control Of Pollution) Act, 1981
4
Noise Pollution and the Law in India
Salina Chalana
Environment Protection Act, 1986
Ishrat Phoolka
Environmental Law: Analysing the Major Indian Statutes
Page i
CHAPTER I
WATER POLLUTION AND THE LAW IN INDIA WITH

REFERENCE TO THE WATER (PREVENTION AND
CONTROL OF POLLUTION) ACT, 1974
Submitted by:
Naina
64/10
8th Semester, Section-B
UILS, PU
Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TOPIC
Pg. No.
INTRODUCTION
ANCIENT INDIANS WATER JURISPRUDENCE
WATER POLLUTION
WATER LAWS IN CONTEMPORARY INDIA
THE WATER (PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION) ACT, 7

1974
History of enactment
Main Object of the Act
Analysing the Important Aspects of the Act
Critical Analysis of the Provisions in Water Act: How Far Effective
1. Definitional shortcomings
2. Shortcomings Regarding Fines and Punishments
3. Procedural Shortcomings
4. Shortcomings with respect to Institutional framework.
5. Other Lacunas
6. Conflict with The Environment Protection Act, 1986
JUDICIAL APPROACH TO CONTROL OF WATER POLLUTION
13
Pollution, Kawadiar, Trivandrum v. the Gwalior Rayon Silk
Manufacturing Member-Secretary, Kerala State Board for
Prevention & Control of Water (Weaving) Company, Ltd,
Kazhikod AIR 1986 Kerala 256
U.P. Pollution Control Board v. M/S. Modi distillery AIR 1988
SC 1128
Tehri Bandh Virodhi Sangarsh Samiti and others v. The State of
Uttar Pradesh and others 1990 SCR, Supl. (2) 606
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India AIR 1988 SC 1115
Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. The CESS Appellate
Committee AIR 1990 SC 2060
Subash Kumar v. State of Bihar AIR 1991 SC 420
Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India
M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath and Others (1997) 1 SCC 388
Corporate Liability under the Water Act
K.K. Nandi v. Amitabha Bannerjee 1983 Cr.L.J. 1479
U.P. PCB v. Mohan Meakins Ltd. AIR 2000 SC 1456
CONCLUSION
21
Page ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The success and final outcome of this project required a lot of guidance and assistance
from many people and I am extremely fortunate to have got this all along the
completion of my project work. Whatever I have done is only due to such guidance
and assistance and I would not forget to thank them.
I respect and thank Ms. Sabina Salim, for giving me an opportunity to do the project
work on the topic Water Pollution and The Law in India With Reference to The
Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 The topic had been so well
dealt in the class room that my class notes helped me a lot to complete this project in
time.
Secondly, my teams mates and friends, Sunakshi, Selina and Ishrat with whom I learnt
the spirit of team work and who had always been so cooperative and passionate while
compiling this project report.
I am thankful to and fortunate enough to get required help from my friends, library
staff and my family while I was working on this project.
Page iii
LIST OF CASES
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
A.P. pollution Board Case (2001) 2 SCC 62

K.K. Nandi v. Amitabha Bannerjee 1983 Cr.L.J. 1479
M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath and Others (1997) 1 SCC 388
Pollution, Kawadiar, Trivandrum v. the Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing
Member-Secretary, Kerala State Board for Prevention & Control of Water
(Weaving) Company, Ltd, Kazhikod AIR 1986 Kerala 256
7) Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. The CESS Appellate Committee AIR 1990
SC 2060
8) Subash Kumar v. State of Bihar AIR 1991 SC 420
9) Tehri Bandh Virodhi Sangarsh Samiti and others v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
and others 1990 SCR, Supl. (2) 606
10) U.P. PCB v. Mohan Meakins Ltd. AIR 2000 SC 1456
11) U.P. Pollution Control Board v. M/S. Modi distillery AIR 1988 SC 1128
12) Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India AIR 1996 SC 2715
13) Vijay Singh Punia v. Rajasthan State Board for Prevention and control of
Water Pollution A.I.R. 2003 Raj. 286 at pp. 286,287,296,297
Page iv
WATER POLLUTION AND THE LAW IN INDIA WITH REFERENCE TO

By means of water we give life to everything.

The Koran, Book of the Prophets 21:30
INTRODUCTION
Comprising over 70% of the Earths surface, water is undoubtedly the most precious
natural resource that exists on our planet. 1 Without the seemingly invaluable
compound comprised of hydrogen and oxygen, life on Earth would be non-existent: it
is essential for everything on our planet to grow and prosper.
In the words of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), water is
the stuff of life and a basic human right.2
Thus, water is an essential element for life including human life on earth and as a
result is a core concern in law. From a legal perspective, the UNDP rightly emphasises
the importance of the human right dimension of water. Yet, in practice, water law is
made up of a number of elements comprising a human right dimension, as well as
economic, environmental or agricultural aspects. In particular, historically, one of the
central concerns of water law has been the development of principles concerning
access to and control over water. The Apex Court of India well knows the importance
of environment and points out the following Six Wholesome Principles:
All human beings have the fundamental right to unpolluted environment,

pollution free water and air.
The State is obligated to preserve and protect the environment.

1
Only 2.5% of all the water on earth is fresh, and only a fraction of that is accessible. According to
various estimates, each of us requires about 50 liters of water per day for drinking, cooking, bathing
and other basic human needs. See Kluger, Jeffery and Dorfman, Andera. The Challenge We Face,
TIME, September 2, 2002, at p. 38.
2
United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 2006 Beyond Scarcity:
Power, Poverty and the Global Water Crisis 1 (New York: UNDP, 2006).
Page 1
It is mandatory for the State and its agencies, to conceive, anticipate prevent
and attack the cause of environmental degradations.
The industry cannot be permitted to continue, as a matter of right, in case it

creates pollution.
The polluter must meet the cost of repairing environment and ecology and pay
reparation to those, who have suffered because of the pollution, caused by him.
Considerations of economy cannot prevail over concerns for environment and
ecology.3
Drinking water is directly essential for human life. Water is also indirectly essential,
for instance, as an indispensable input in agriculture. Yet, despite the central role that
water has always played in sustaining life, human lives and human economies, the
development of formal water law has been relatively slow and often patchy. At the
domestic level, colonial legislation first focused on the regulation of water for
economic reasons, for instance, through the development of legislation concerning
irrigation and navigation. Over the past few decades, increasing water pollution and
decreasing per capita availability have led to the development of other measures such
as water quality regulation and an emphasis on water delivery, particularly in cities, as
well as environment-related measures. Yet, water law remains largely sectoral to-date.
At the international level, water regulation first focused mostly on navigation in
international watercourses. It has progressively evolved to encompass issues
concerning the sharing of international waters. International water law has, however,
not yet reached the stage where it provides an overall regime for the regulation of
water uses.4
ANCIENT INDIANS WATER JURISPRUDENCE
Preservation of nature is as old as civilization itself. There is evidence that the people
in Harappa and Mohenjodaro were nature-worshippers, and that the forces of nature
3
Vijay Singh Punia v. Rajasthan State Board for Prevention and control of Water Pollution A.I.R. 2003
Raj. 286 at pp. 286,287,296,297
4
Cullet, Philippe, Water Law in India: Overview of Existing Framework and Proposed Reforms,
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW RESEARCH CENTRE, Working Paper (2007),
http://www.ielrc.org/content/w0701.pdf (last accessed on 23-03-2014)
Page 2
were treated with reverence and piety. The ancient and medieval Indians placed great
emphases on the purity of environment. Strict religious orders were in vogue against
polluting the watercourses like public wells and rivers. Yaganas were often performed
to purify the air by burning fragrant materials. Rivers were considered to be sacred.
These practices in the context in which they were carried on, significantly differed
from the concept of purity of environment we are today striving to maintain. As the
inherent nature of pollution itself has undergone a tremendous change, today pollution
is no more viewed from the point of any religious order of sacredness, but is looked
upon as a scientific and technological phenomenon. It emerges from the
industrialization and urbanization. The answer to its cure definitely does not lie in any
religious order or rite; but in self-restraint and adoption of better scientific and
technological devices. The major off shoots of environmental pollution are: Water, Air
and Noise. All these three are so inter-linked and sometimes, so overlapping that one
cannot be controlled without controlling the other.5
Manu writes in, The laws of Manu,
And from light as it transforms itself come the waters, which are traditionally
known to have the quality of taste; and from the waters comes earth, with the
quality of smell. This is the creation in the beginning.6
There are also innumerable prohibitions against the defilement of water, including a
bar on urinating in water,7 throwing any other bodily fluids or excrement into the
rivers.8 Years later too wrote at length about conservation of nature in his treatise,
the Arthashastra. He wrote about the duty of state in maintaining forests, preserving
sources of water, and protecting wildlife. Many Ashokan edicts also spell out rules
and guidelines for the use and preservation of natural resources.9
Varma, Vikas, Legal Control of Water Pollution in India (January 2006),

http://works.bepress.com/vikasvarma/2 (last accessed on 23/03/204)
6
Ch.1 Verse 78. See The Laws of Manu ( Wendy Doniger and Brian Smith Trans., 1991), at p. 11
Ch., Verses 46-49, at p. 78.
Ch. Verse56, at p. 79.
Rosencranz, Armin & Divan, Shyam, Environmental Law and Policy in India, OXFORD
UNIVERSITY PRESS, 2nd Edn, New Delhi, 2001, at pp. 24-25.
Page 3
In contemporary India, water law is made of different components. It includes

international treaties, federal and state acts. It also includes a number of less formal
arrangements, including water and water-related policies as well as customary rules
and regulations. This project maps out the relevant legal framework concerning water
in India.
WATER POLLUTION
The unconscionable industrialization, the unpardonable deforestation and
inhuman extermination, of living species betray an exploitative brutality and
anti-social appetite for profit and pleasure which is incompatible with
humanism and conservationism. Today a bath in the Yamuna and Ganga is a
sin against bodily health, not a salvation for the soul, so polluted and noxious
are these holy waters now.
-Justice V.R.Krishna Iyer10
Water Pollution is a phenomenon that is characterized by the deterioration of the
quality of land water (rivers, lakes marshes and ground water) or sea water as a result
of various human activities. Water Pollution is any physical or chemical change in
water that can adversely affect organisms. It is a global problem, affecting both the
industrial and developing nations.
Following are the eight major types of water pollutants:
Oxygen demanding wastes (domestic sewage, animal manure and some

industrial waste)
Disease causing agents (bacteria, virus & parasites)
Inorganic chemicals & minerals (acids, salts and toxic metals)
Organic chemicals (pesticides, plastics, detergents, industrial wastes and oils)
Plant nutrients (nitrates and phosphates)
Segments (soils, silt and other solids from land erosion)
10
Krishna Iyer, Environmental Pollution and the Law, 1984 at p. 95 quoted in Chaterjee, Benimadhab,
Implementation problems and Perspectives, 2002, at p. 9.
Page 4
Radioactive substances
Heat (from industrial and power plant cooling water)
The main sources of water pollution are:
Sewage and Domestic wastes
Industrial effluents
Agricultural discharges
Fertilizers
Detergents
Toxic metals
Siltation
Thermal pollutants
Radioactive materials11
WATER LAWS IN CONTEMPORARY INDIA

Clean water is sine qua non for human existence. Its importance as an industrial
perquisite cannot be ruled out for any industrial nation. In India, since the advent of
codified law due importance has been given to clean water. The Indian Penal Code
(IPC), the first penal statute passed by the British Government as early as in 1860
contains comprehensive provisions to restraint the occurrence of pollution of water.
Section 277 of the Code provides:
Whoever voluntarily corrupts or fouls the water of any public spring,
reservoir so as to render it less fit for the purpose for which it is ordinarily
used, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
11
Khitoliya, R.K., Environment Protection and the Law (2009) at 123-25.
Page 5
which may extend to three months, or with fine which may extend to five
hundred rupees, or with both.12
This section renders a person liable for public nuisance if he voluntarily fouls the
water of a public spring or reservoir, so as to render it less fit for which it is ordinarily
used. A similar provision is embodied in the Northern India Canal and Drainage Act
of 1873. Besides, all the Municipalities Acts contain general provisions, which
empower the municipalities to control pollution of water in their respective territories.
All these statutes, however, had limited application. For example section 277 of I.P.C.
did not apply to river pollution and private wells. Even the tortious remedy against
polluter confined only to private nuisance, which could create a cause of action for an
injunction, damages or both. These legal provisions thus could not prove efficacious
against the spread of pollution that began to occur as a result of Indias rapidly
growing population, accompanied by increasing hazards of domestic and industrial
needs with the recent added array of agricultural pesticides and insecticides which
have further aggravated the problem of water pollution.
Consequently, certain states began to feel that need of foreclosing the rapid growth of
pollution of their water resources by passing special laws. In 1953 the State of Orissa
took a lead by passing the Orissa River Pollution Prevention Act. Maharashtra, one of
the most industrialized and densely populated states came out with a much more
comprehensive statue: Maharashtra Prevention of Water Pollution Act, 1969. But as in
the case of general statutes, like IPC, these statutes too failed to keep pace with the
expanding needs of industrialization and urbanization. Therefore, the feeling began to
strengthen that water pollution has become a national problem which can be tackled
only at national level. Keeping this in view it was thought expedient not to depend on
the efforts of individual states but to centralize the whole scheme of water pollution
control. But this could be done only after having successful recourse to articles 249
and 250 of the Constitution. Because under the Constitution water constitutes a state
subject on which the states enjoy the exclusive power to legislate; except in the case
of regulation and development of inter-state rivers and river valleys to which only the
Central Government is empowered to legislate by virtue of entry 56 of the union list
of the Seventh Schedule. This formed the basis for the enacting a comprehensive
12
The Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sec. 277.
Page 6
statue to prevent and control water pollution in India called; The Water (Prevention
and Control of Pollution), Act, 1974 (herein after referred to as the Act).
History of enactment
"Water" being a "state subject", the Parliament can exercise the power to legislate on
"water" only under articles 249 and 252 of the Constitution of India. In pursuance of
article 252(1) of the Constitution, resolutions were passed by all Houses of the
Legislatures of the States of Assam, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Haryana,
Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Karnataka, Kerala, Rajasthan, Tripura and
West-B0engal to the effect that the matters relating to prevention and control of water
pollution should be regulated by the Parliament by law. Accordingly the Parliament
enacted the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. The Water Act
represents one of India's first attempts to deal with an environmental issue
comprehensively. The Water Act was first amended in 1978. It was again amended in
1988 to conform to the provisions of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.13
Main Object of the Act
The main aim and object of the Act of 1974 is 'to maintain or restore the
wholesomeness of water and to prevent, control and abate water pollution'. To
achieve these objectives, the Act has provided various chapters which are very
comprehensive. The fundamental objective of the act is to provide clean drinking
water to the citizens.14 The other main objectives are:
i) To provide for the preservation and control of water pollution, and the maintaining or
restoring of wholesomeness of water.
ii) To establish Central and State Boards for the prevention and control of water
pollution.
iii)To provide for conferring on and assigning to such Boards powers and functions
relating thereto and for matters connected therewith.
13
Nishtha Jaswal & Paramjit S. Jaswal, Environmental Law, 3rd Edn. (2013)
14
A.P. Pollution Control Board (II) v. M.V. Nayudu (2001) 2 SCC 62 at 79
Page 7
iv)To provide penalties for the contravention of the provisions of the Water Act.
v) To establish Central and State water-testing laboratories to enable the Board to assess
the extent of pollution, lay down standards and establish guilt or default.
Analysing the Important Aspects of the Act
In view of sub-section 2(e) read with Sections 17 and 18 of this Act, the fundamental
objective of the statute is to provide clean water to citizens. The definition of water
pollution in the act is a very comprehensive definition and covers all the changes in
physical, chemical or biological properties of water. The definition also covers the rise
in the temperature of water and discharge of radioactive substances in the water. The
Act has used two terms in relation to water pollution- stream and well. The 'stream'
here includes (a) river, (b) water courses (whether flowing or for the time being dry),
(c) inland water (whether natural or artificial), (d) subterranean water (underground
water), (e) Sea or tidal water.15
This is the Act that established the Central and a State Board and also the authority
and power to constitute as many committees as it feels essential to carry out specific
functions for it. The Act specifically prohibits any poisonous, noxious or polluting
matter into any stream or well. Consent from the State Board is required for any type
of new discharge into any new stream or well. This also includes consent for
temperature discharges as done by cooling tower users. In general, this means that a
State consent or permit is required for all types of intake and/or discharge of any type
of liquid or water either from a running stream or well.
The functions and powers of Joint Boards are similar to those of State Board as to
promote cleanliness of water and to prevent pollution. Various measures have been
taken for prevention of water pollution in India. The municipal bodies are entrusted
with the control of solid wastes through treatment plants, throughout the country.
Despite all these efforts, the massive problem of water pollution still remains
unabated.
15
Prasoon Agrawal, Critical Analysis of Water (Prevention and Control) Act, 1974, November, 2012,
INTERNATIONAL INDEXED & REFERRED RESEARCH JOURNAL,
http://www.ssmrae.com/admin/images/54c835cf71cc4c76ce5a2b8691a21ccf.pdf (Last accessed on 2803-2014)
Page 8
Under these rules, effluent standards to be complied with by persons while causing
discharge of sewage or sullage or both have been specified. Standards for small
scale industries have been specified separately.
Penalties for non-compliance with the permit or polluting in any way are
imprisonment for three months and fine of Rs.10,000 (One US Dollar equals about
thirty six Indian Rupees) or fine up to Rs. 5,000 per day of violation or both plus any
expenses incurred by the Board for sampling, analysis, inspection etc. These penalties
can also be imposed for obstructing any person acting under the orders or direction
of the Board or for damages to any work or property of the Board.
There are penalties also which extend up to seven years plus other monetary fines for
other similar offenses. Any director, manager, secretary or other officer of the
company may also be deemed to be guilty if proved that the offense occurred with
their consent or connivance. In case of the government, department head could be
held liable.16
Critical Analysis of the Provisions in Water Act: How Far Effective
It is often argued that our enforcement mechanism is very weak although the laws are
very well drawn up. But, a careful analysis of the laws may reveal their inherent
deficiencies which are closely linked to lapses in enforcement. There are
many shortcomings in the provisions of the Water Act, 1974, which can be mentioned
under different heads:
1. Definitional shortcomings:
a) First, in the Preamble itself which only speaks of prevention and control of water
pollution and not total prohibition of water pollution.
b) Secondly, in the term outlet,17 it is not clear whether intention to pollute water is a
prerequisite for application of this Act.
c) Thirdly, the definition of pollution 18 does not include pollution of water due to its
radiological disintegration.
16
Harish C. Sharma, Pollution Control Acts and Regulations of India, PETROLEUM BAZAAR,
http://www.petroleumbazaar.com/Admin%5CActsandControls%5CPollution_control_act.pdf (Last
accessed on 28-03-2014).
17
See Sec. 2 (dd) of The Water Act, 1974.
18
See Sec. 2 (e) of The Water Act, 1974.
Page 9
d) Fourthly, the definition of the term Stream19 does not include rain water, thereby
giving right to pollute the rain water.
e) Fifthly, some very relevant and important terms like pollutants, toxic pollutants,
discharge of pollutants etc. are not defined.
2. Shortcomings Regarding Fines and Punishments:
a) Possible offences are not specifically defined and also the punishments prescribed are
not applicable to for all probable violations.
b) Punishments mentioned on the Act are not such as to give a deterrent effect.
Punishment is provided only if violation is committed knowingly. It is not provided
for negligent acts20 of the polluter.
c) The Fines prescribed are also small and also, imprisonment as a punishment is not
compulsory in all cases of violations.21
3. Procedural Shortcomings
a) As per the legal provision for penal action against the polluters, the State Pollution
Control Board has to file a case before the lower court for action against a polluting
unit and the "onus of proof" is vested with the Board In a good number of cases where
decisions are taken, the polluters have been given the benefit of doubt because of
technical reasons as the Boards could not adequately meet the "onus of proof".
b) Yet another legal lacunae faced by the Pollution Control Boards relates to prosecution
against public servants. According" to the provisions of Sec. 197 of the Cr.
P.C., permission from the Government is required for prosecution of such persons and
more often than not it becomes difficult for the Boards to take legal action against
them.
c) The Central Pollution Control Board can issue directions to the State Boards, which
are binding on them. However, at the same time, the Act makes it obligatory for the
Boards to comply with the directions of the concerned State Governments. There are
occasions when the directions of two authorities are not mutually complementary and,
at times, totally contradictory! 22
19
See Sec. 2 (j) of The Water Act, 1974.
20
There is no concept of absolute liability under The Water Act, 1974 See section 24 of The Water Act,
1974.
21
See Sec. 24, 25 and 26 of Water Act, 1974.
22
See Sec. 18 of The Water Act, 1974.
Page 10
d) The key person for enforcement of this Act is the Chairman of the State Pollution
Control Board who should be professionally qualified and appointed on a full time
basis. However, the Act does not stipulate such requirement.23 Several State Pollution
Control Boards are headed by part-time Chairmen without requisite qualifications and
experience. Also, the Member Secretaries of the Pollution Control Boards are often
drawn either from administrative service or even forest service, who, do not have the
requisite technical background in pollution control. As a result, it becomes difficult
for them to provide proper leadership and guidance to their sub-ordinates.
4. Shortcomings with respect to Institutional framework.
a) The Pollution Control Boards are hardly equipped with the necessary wherewithal to
cope up with these daunting tasks. Professional manpower and laboratory
infrastructure for pollution monitoring are the basic requirements for effective
functioning of the pollution control machinery.
b) The inadequacy in our enforcement mechanism is evident from a comparison with
other countries. In USA, the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) has more than
10,000 employees while the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) in India has to
make it with less than 500 personnel.
c) The Pollution Control Boards are expected to function as statutory autonomous
bodies. But, in reality, the Boards cannot function in such a manner for various
reasons including over-dependence on the Government for their existence. For
effective
functioning,
the
Pollution
Control
Boards
should
have
the autonomyand over-ridding powers to enforce the laws.

d) The Pollution Control Boards are expected to receive funds from the Government
exchequer for their Plan and Non-plan expenditure. But, several State Governments
have curbed and even totally stopped the "grants-in-aid" to the Boards.
5. Other Lacunas
a) There is no system of compulsory public hearing
b) There is no specific provision in the Act for Public Participation, for better
implementation of the Act.
c) There are no provisions in the Act for fixing up standards of quality and targets for
eradication of pollution.
23
See Sec. 4(2) (a) of The Water Act, 1974.
Page 11
d) State government has the power24 to limit the application of this Act to a particular
area in a state. But this power in most of the cases is used arbitrarily.25
6. Conflict with The Environment Protection Act, 1986
In response to Stockholm Conference, India enacted The Environmental (Protection)
Act, 1986 and the corresponding Environmental (Protection) Rules, 1986. This Act is
a general enactment empowering the Central Government to prevent, control and
abate environmental pollution.26 As the ambit of the Act includes water resources, its
provisions extend to the streams, lakes, rivers etc. and a citizen has recourse to the
mechanism under the EP Act.27
Under Section 49 of the WaterAct the public can approach the court on violation of
the Act. However, like in the EPA the usefulness of this provision is debatable since
only the authorized Government officials can collect the samples. Though the State
Board is to make available relevant reports to the complaining citizens, it can refuse
to do so if it thinks that the disclosures would harm "public interest".28
The Act was amended in 1988 and the penal provisions of the Act were brought in
line with the 1987 amendments to the Air Act. The penal provisions as discussed
earlier are in practice ineffective. Also there is the question of conflict that may arise
when both the Water Act and the Environment (Protection) Act come into play
together.
JUDICIAL APPROACH TO CONTROL OF WATER POLLUTION
In environmental litigations, the anxiety of the courts is to find out appropriate
remedies for the environmental protection is given much importance. In legal sense,
pollution of water means a departure from a normal sense. The normal sense denotes
24
See Section 19 of the Environmental (Protection) Act, 1986.
25
See A.P. pollution Board Case [2001] 2 SCC 62.Where despite declaring a particular area as water
prone area , state govt. later allowed certain industrial set up in that area by limiting the application of
Water Act, 1974. However, this was struck down by the A.P. High Court.
26
Section 3.
27
However in case of any conflict between Water Act and EP Act, the former will prevail over the later
as former being specific legislation.
28
The Energy and esource Institute, Review of the Existing Environmental Norms Concerning Power
Sector, TERI Report No. 99 pg. 64, CENTRAL ELECRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION,
http://cercind.gov.in/chapter1.pdf (Last accessed on 28-03-14)
Page 12
unaffected or least affected physical and biological conditions of water for human
activities. These are some of the cases where the judiciary has interpreted the cases for
the benefit and prevention of environment and water pollution.
Pollution, Kawadiar, Trivandrum v. the Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing
Member-Secretary, Kerala State Board for Prevention & Control of Water
(Weaving) Company, Ltd, Kazhikod29
The Cess Act grants rebates in the cess payable to those who had installed a plant for
the treatment of sewage or trade effluent. The Company claimed that it had installed a
treatment plant and was therefore entitled to a rebate. This claim was declined. The
legality of the levy of cess was thereupon challenged in the writ petitions. The present
writ appeals are taken against the findings of the Judge in the writ petitions. If the
plant installed is one, which gives a satisfactory treatment of the trade effluent, rebate
could be given under Section 7 of the Cess Act so long as the treatment of the effluent
is effective from the point of view of the Pollution Act. The Court was also of the
view that the question involved is not a mere interpretation of a section of a statute but
has larger overtones with a direct nexus to the life and health of the people. A
reference to a treaty, protocol or convention is permissible while interpreting laws,
which have a link or background with such document. The Court surveyed recent
international action in the area of environmental protection, including the 1972 United
Nations Conference on the Human Environment, and national measures to develop
environmental legislation and said that these had a direct connection with the
enactment of the comprehensive Pollution Act, which the Court could not disregard.
U.P. Pollution Control Board v. M/S. Modi distillery30
Modi Distillery situated at Modi Nagar, Ghaziabad was engaged in the manufacture of
industrial alcohol and was discharging highly noxious effluents into the Kali River in
contravention of a statutory requirement to obtain a permit from the Pollution Control
Board. The issue before Court was whether the Chairman, Vice Chairman, Managing
Director and Members of the Board, were liable to be proceeded against under
Section 47 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act in the absence of a
29
AIR 1986 Kerala 256
30
AIR 1988 SC 1128
Page 13
prosecution of the Company owning the industry. The Court held that on a combined
reading of sub sections (1) and (2) of Section 47 of the Act, it had no doubt that the
Chairman, Managing Director, and members of the Board of Directors of Messers
Modi Industries Limited, the Company owning the plant in question, could be
prosecuted for having been in charge of and responsible to the company for the
business of the industrial unit and could be deemed guilty of the offence for which
they are charged.
Tehri Bandh Virodhi Sangarsh Samiti and others v. The State of Uttar Pradesh and
others31
A Petition was field in the SC under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution. The
petitioners prayed that the Union of India, State of Uttar Pradesh and the Tehri Hydro
Development Corporation be restrained from constructing and implementing the Tehri
Hydro Power Project and the Tehri Dam. The main grievance of the Petitioners was
that in preparing the plan for the project the safety aspects have not been adequately
taken into consideration. It was asserted that as the area in which the dam is to be
constructed is prone to earthquakes, the construction of the dam would pose a serious
threat to the life, ecology and the environments of the entire northern India. The Court
stated that it does not possess the requisite expertise to render any final opinion on the
rival contentions of the experts. The Court can only "investigate and adjudicate the
question as to whether the Government was conscious to the inherent danger as
pointed out by the Petitioners and applied its mind to the safety of the dam. We have
already given facts in detail which show that the Government has considered the
question on several occasions in the light of the opinion expressed by the experts". In
view of the material on record, the Court did not find any good reason to issue a
direction restraining the respondents from proceeding with the implementation of the
project and accordingly, the petition was dismissed. Writ Petition (Civil)
No.725/1994, "And Quite Flows Maili Yamuna Vs Central Pollution Control Board
& Ors. In this case the Central Pollution Control Board was filing Monitoring Reports
in compliance of the Honble Supreme Court. The Central Pollution Control Board
submitted its monitoring report on water quality on River Yamuna at Palla, Agra
Canal and at Okhla. Besides river Yamuna the Central Board also monitor the drains
31
1990 SCR, Supl. (2) 606
Page 14
at the point prior to discharge into the river Yamuna for assessing the wastewater
quality and pollution load. The Central Board is monitoring the river Yamuna for its
water quality at five locations along with 25 drains in compliance of the orders of the
Honble Supreme Court and have submitted results of 71 rounds of monitoring since
1999. Pollution in Western Yamuna Canal: The Western Yamuna Canal is the source
of raw water for drinking purposes for capital city Delhi. Earlier, the Central Pollution
Control Board has received several complaints from Delhi Jal Board regarding bad
quality of raw water in Westen Yamuna Canal and thereby ordered closure of
Haiderpur and Nangloi water works for several hours. The officials of the Central
Board conducted a survey of the pollution sources of Western Yamuna Canal. The
survey revealed that the pollution in Western Yamuna Canal is caused due to the
industries located in Yamuna Nagar, Haryana and also from the Municipal Council
Yamunagar and Jagadhari (Sewage Treatment Plants). On the basis of the survey the
Central Board has issued directions under Section 5 of the Environment (Protecting)
Act, 1986 to the industries located in the Yamuna Nagar, Haryana. The Industries
have filed Writ Petitions in the Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh and got
stay orders against the directions issued by the Central Board. The Central Board has
filed status of the Western Yamuna Canal in the Supreme Court of India vide its
affidavit, dated 15.10.2003 the Honble Court on 15.4.2004 directed that the reports
of the Central Pollution Control Board and Haryana State Pollution Control Board be
sent to the Committee in the Ministry of Environment & Forests for examination. The
matter is under consideration of the said Committee.32
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India33
This is a famous case of Ganga water pollution case. River Ganga is noted for its
historical significance and religious importance and is considered most sacred by the
Hindus in India. A number of cities, towns and villages belonging to U.P, Bihar, West
Bengal etc are located on the banks of the river. Thus, the Ganga water got polluted as
industrial wastes, chemical effluents, human excrete etc are being discharged into the
river. Further, a number of dead bodies are being thrown into the river at Kasi with a
belief that the dead persons could go to heaven directly since they consider Kasi as
32
A. Usha, Water Pollution-Judicial Response, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?

abstract_id=955227 (Last accessed on 28-03-14)
33
AIR 1988 SC 1115
Page 15
holy place and the river as sacred. This Ganga water was polluted in different ways
with huge quantities of effluents. The Supreme Court in this case directed that
whenever applications for licenses to establish new industries are made such
applications should be refused unless adequate provision has been made for the
treatment of trade effluents flowing out of the factories and that immediate action
should be taken against the existing industries if they are found responsible for
pollution of water.
The Petitioner filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court for the prevention of
nuisance caused by the pollution of the River Ganga by tanneries and soap factories
on the banks of the river, at Kanpur. The petition was entertained as public interest
litigation to enforce the statutory provisions that impose duties on the Municipal
Authorities and the Boards constituted under the Water Act. The Supreme Court
issued several directives to the Kanpur Municipal Corporation to prevent and control
pollution of the River Ganga at Kanpur. While making its order the Court observed
that nuisance caused by the pollution of the River Ganga was widespread and was a
serious public nuisance. On account of failure of authorities to carry out these
statutory duties for several years, the water in the River Ganga at Kanpur has become
so polluted that the people either for drinking or bathing can no longer use it. The
Court also pronounced that what they have stated in this case applies mutatis
mutandis to all other Mahapalikas and Municipalities that have jurisdiction over areas
through which the River Ganga flows, and ordered that a copy of its judgment be sent
to all such institutions. The Court also expressed the view that "having regard to the
need for protecting and improving the environment which is considered a
fundamental duty under the Constitution, it is the duty of the Central Government to
direct all educational institutions to teach at least one hour a week lessons relating to
the protection and improvement of the natural environment including forests, lakes,
rivers, and wild life in the first ten classes"
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India34
Public interest litigation was filed requesting the court to prevent tanneries, which
were polluting the River Ganga, from operating until they installed primary effluent
treatment plants. The court passed the order accordingly. The Court in its judgement
34
AIR 1988 SC 1037
Page 16
quoted the following passages from the United Nations Conference of the Human
Environment held in 1972 in Stockholm: "Both aspects of man's environment, the
natural and the man made, are essential to his well being and the enjoyment of basic
human rights - even the right to life itself. The protection and improvement of the
human environment is a major issue which affects the well being of peoples and
economic development throughout the world, it is the urgent desire of the peoples of
the whole world and the duty of all governments." "What is needed is an enthusiastic
but calm state of mind and intense but orderly work...To defend and improve the
human environment for present and future generations has become an imperative
goal...Achievement of this environmental goal will demand the acceptance of
responsibility by citizens and communities and by enterprises and institutions at every
level." The Court, while ordering the closure of certain tanneries observed that it was
conscious that the closure of the tanneries might bring unemployment.
Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. The CESS Appellate Committee35
The Appellant established a thermal power station on the banks of River Chambal,
which consume water drawn from the river for cooling of the plant. The appellant
filed an appeal under Section 13 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution)
Cess Act 1977 in respect of the cess claimed for a particular period. The appellate
authority holding that the appellant was not entitled to a rebate dismissed the appeal.
Following the dismissal of successive appeals and petitions, the appellant appealed to
the Supreme Court challenging the dismissal of the petitions by the Divisional Bench
of the Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court remitted the matter to the Assessing
Authority for re assessment of the cess and gave further directions, which the
Authority was required to comply with. The Court said that Section 25(1) has nothing
to do with a plant installed for the treatment of effluent, although the grant of consent
to a new outlet can be conditional on the existence of a plant for the satisfactory
treatment of effluents, to safeguard against pollution of water in the stream.
Subash Kumar v. State of Bihar36
35
AIR 1990 SC 2060
36
AIR 1991 SC 420
Page 17
Herein the Petitioner filed a public interest petition in terms of Article 32 of the
Constitution, pleading infringement of the right to life guaranteed by Article 21 of the
Constitution, arising from the pollution of the Bokaro river by the sludge/slurry
discharged from the washeries of the Tata Iron and Steel Company Limited (TISCO).
It was alleged that as a result of the release of effluent into the river, its water is not fit
for drinking purposes or for irrigation. The Respondents established that TISCO and
the State Pollution Control Board had complied with the statutory requirements, and
that the Petitioner was motivated by self-interest. The Court observed that Article 32
is designed for the enforcement of fundamental rights. The right to life enshrined in
Article 21, includes the right to enjoyment of pollution-free water and air for the full
enjoyment of life. If anything endangers or impairs the quality of life, an affected
person or a person genuinely interested in the protection of society would have
recourse to Article 32. Pubic interest litigation envisages legal proceedings for
vindication or enforcement of fundamental rights of a group of persons or community
that are not able to enforce their fundamental rights on account of their incapacity,
poverty or ignorance of law. However, public interest litigation cannot be resorted to
satisfy a personal grudge or enmity. Personal interest cannot be enforced through the
process of Court under Article 32 in the garb of public interest litigation. Since the
instant case was motivated by self-interest, it was accordingly dismissed.
Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India37
In Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum case, the Supreme Court was approached by the
petitioner to issue directions against the tannery pollution caused by the discharge of
untreated effluents in Vellore area in Tamilnadu. The untreated effluents affected the
agricultural lands, groundwater and health of the local people. The Court delivered a
landmark judgement in this case and directed the tanneries to set up effluent treatment
plants. About 20the quantum of compensation to be awarded to the affected people in
the area. The court has for the first tim0 tanneries, which failed to establish effluent
treatment plants, were closed in the interest of the public. The court directed the
central government to constitute an authority under Environmental (Protection) Act,
1986 to deal with polluting industries. The result, the Loss of Ecology Commission
was set up to assess e invented pollution fine against the tanneries that devastated
37
AIR 1996 SC 2715
Page 18
the area. In this case, the Supreme Court adopted the international principles such as
precautionary principle, polluter pays principle and the concept of sustainable
development as part of law of the land. The Court also suggested that the Madras
High Court set up a Green Bench to deal with environmental cases exclusively.38
M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath and Others39
In the impugned case, the Court took notice of an article which appeared in the Indian
Express stating that a private company "Span Motels Pvt. Ltd.", to which the family
of Kamal Nath, a former Minister of Environment and Forests, had a direct link, had
built a motel on the bank of the River Beas on land leased by the Indian Government
in 1981. Span Motels had also encroached upon an additional area of land adjoining
this leasehold area, and this area was later leased out to Span Motels when Kamal
Nath was Minister in 1994. The motel used earthmovers and bulldozers to turn the
course of the River Beas, create a new channel and divert the river's flow. The course
of the river was diverted to save the motel from future floods. Here the constitutional
provisions i.e., Article 21 and 32 and Forest Conservation Act of 1980 were applied.
The Supreme Court of India in this case decided that the prior approval for the
additional leasehold land, given in 1994, is quashed and the Government shall take
over the area and restore it to its original condition. Span Motels will pay
compensation to restore the environment, and the various constructions on the bank of
the River Beas must be removed and reversed. Span motels must show why a
pollution fine should not be imposed; pursuant to the polluter pays principle.
Regarding the land covered by the 1981 lease, Span Motels shall construct a boundary
wall around the area covered by this lease, and Span Motels shall not encroach upon
any part of the river basin. In addition, this motel shall not discharge untreated
effluents into the river. This ruling is based on the public trust doctrine, under which
the Government is the trustee of all natural resources, which are by nature meant for
public use and enjoyment. The Court reviewed the public trust cases from the United
States and noted that under English common law this doctrine extended only to
traditional uses such as navigation, commerce and fishing, but expressed doubts as to
38
L. Pushpa Kumar, CPREEC, Environment Law in India, Part III, C.P.R. ENVIRONMENT
EDUCATION CENTRE, http://www.cpreec.org/143.htm (Last accessed on 01-04-2014)
39
(1997) 1 SCC 388
Page 19
how the doctrine is now being extended to all ecologically important lands, including
freshwater, wetlands and riparian forests.
Corporate Liability under the Water Act
The water Act has extended the liability for violations committed by companies to
certain corporate employees and officials and to heads of govt. Departments. 40 The
judiciary has time and again held this provision of the Act.
K.K. Nandi v. Amitabha Bannerjee41
Discussing the liability of a manager, the Calcutta High Court in the impugned case
held that a person designated as a manager of a company is prima facie liable under
Sec. 47. The court observed that whether or not such person was in fact the overall incharge of the affairs of the factory and whether or not he had any knowledge of the
violations of the Act, are questions of fact to be determined at the stage of trial.
U.P. PCB v. Mohan Meakins Ltd.42
The Apex Court made it clear that the directors/managers/partners would also be held
responsible if they were responsible for construction of the plant, for the treatment of
highly polluting and toxic effluents and will be prosecuted and punished under the
Act.43
CONCLUSION
The Water Act is a very useful act in the present scenario. This Act is successful in
controlling the water pollution to a large extent at the Central and State level.
Formation of CPSB and SPCB has made a vast difference in terms of checking the
pollution and controlling it. There are still some lacunas that are present inside this act
and which we can infer from the above stated case laws. The need is to make this Act
more powerful and applicable. The Act gives the power to central and state
government to take actions against those who pollute the water and use it unnecessary.
40
Sec. 47-48.
41
1983 Cr.L.J. 1479
42
AIR 2000 SC 1456
43
Jain, Ashok K., Law and Environment, 3rd Edn. (2005) at 127-128
Page 20
There is also a procedure to prescribe for penalties and compensations. The Act has
served a very useful in controlling the pollution of water and it has to be strengthened
more, for its future implications.
There Judicial Activism forged new tools and devised new remedies and with public
interest litigation, the Supreme Court has refashioned its institutional role to readily
enforce rights of the people and even impose positive obligations on the State. The
environmental justice in India owes to the higher judiciary. And the higher judiciary
plays a rather stalwart role owing to its unique position and power, 44 and due to the
circumstances of inefficiency within the executive and the existence of a skeletal
legislative framework.45
44
Upendra Baxi has commented on the Indian Supreme Court as the most powerful court of the world.
Upendra Baxi, The Travils of Stare Decisis in India, Butterworths, Included in the Legal Theory
Course Material, Compiled by Prof.Krishna Deva Rao (for internal circulation) GNLU, (Feburary
2006)
45
S.P.Sathe opinion that the Indian parliaments have stopped legislating in the last two decades.
S.P.Sathe, Extracts from Judicial Activism in India, Included in THE LEGAL THEORY COURSE
MATERIAL, Complied by Prof.Krishna Deva Rao (for internal circulation) GNLU, (February 2006).
Page 21
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS REFERRED
Jain, Ashok K., Law and Environment, 3rd Edn. (2005).
Khitoliya, R.K., Environment Protection and the Law (2009).
Nishtha Jaswal & Paramjit S. Jaswal, Environmental Law, 3rd Edn. (2013).
Rosencranz, Armin & Divan, Shyam, Environmental Law and Policy in India, OXFORD
UNIVERSITY PRESS, 2nd Edn, New Delhi, 2001.
5) The Laws of Manu (Wendy Doniger and Brian Smith Trans., 1991).
1)
2)
3)
4)
ARTICLE/JOURNALS/NEWS-ITEMS REFERRED
1) Cullet, Philippe, Water Law in India: Overview of Existing Framework and Proposed Reforms,
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW RESEARCH CENTRE, Working Paper (2007),
http://www.ielrc.org/content/w0701.pdf
2) Kluger, Jeffery and Dorfman, Andera. The Challenge We Face, TIME, September 2, 2002.
3) Krishna Iyer, Environmental Pollution and the Law, 1984 at p. 95 quoted in Chaterjee, Benimadhab,
Implementation problems and Perspectives, 2002.
4) Prasoon Agrawal, Critical Analysis of Water (Prevention and Control) Act, 1974, November, 2012,
INTERNATIONAL INDEXED & REFERRED RESEARCH JOURNAL,
http://www.ssmrae.com/admin/images/54c835cf71cc4c76ce5a2b8691a21ccf.pdfHarish C. Sharma,
Pollution Control Acts and Regulations of India, PETROLEUM BAZAAR,
http://www.petroleumbazaar.com/Admin%5CActsandControls%5CPollution_control_act.pdf
5) Pushpa Kumar, CPREEC, Environment Law in India, Part III, C.P.R. ENVIRONMENT EDUCATION
CENTRE, http://www.cpreec.org/143.htm
6) S.P.Sathe opinion that the Indian parliaments have stopped legislating in the last two decades.
S.P.Sathe, Extracts from Judicial Activism in India, Included in THE LEGAL THEORY COURSE
MATERIAL, Complied by Prof.Krishna Deva Rao (for internal circulation) GNLU, (February 2006).
7) The Energy and esource Institute, Review of the Existing Environmental Norms Concerning Power
Sector, TERI Report No. 99 pg. 64, CENTRAL ELECRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION,
http://cercind.gov.in/chapter1.pdf
8) United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 2006 Beyond Scarcity:
Power, Poverty and the Global Water Crisis 1 (New York: UNDP, 2006).
9) Upendra Baxi has commented on the Indian Supreme Court as the most powerful court of the world.
Upendra Baxi, The Travils of Stare Decisis in India, Butterworths, Included in the Legal Theory
Course Material, Compiled by Prof.Krishna Deva Rao (for internal circulation) GNLU, (Feburary
2006)
10) Usha, Water Pollution-Judicial Response, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=955227
11) Varma, Vikas, Legal Control of Water Pollution in India (January 2006),
http://works.bepress.com/vikasvarma/2
Page v
CHAPTER II
AIR POLLUTION AND THE LAW IN INDIA WITH

REFERENCE TO THE AIR (PREVENTION AND CONTROL
OF POLLUTION) ACT, 1981
There's so much pollution in the air now that if it weren't for

our lungs there'd be no place to put it all.
-Robert Orben
Submitted by:
Sunakshi Sharma
59/10
8th Semester
Section - B
Page i
Page ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction
2. Defining Air Pollution
3. Air Pollution in India
4. Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981
5. Judicial Approach
6. Shortcomings
7. Conclusion
8. Bibliography
Page iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I have given all my efforts in this project. However, it would not have been possible
without the kind support and help of many individuals. I would like to extend my
sincere thanks to all of them. I am highly indebted to my teacher, Ms. Sabina Salim
for her guidance and providing necessary information regarding the project.
I would also like to express gratitude towards my team mates and friends, Naina,
Salina and Ishrat with whom I learnt the spirit of team work and who were so cooperative and dedicated while compiling this project report.
Page iv
LIST OF CASES
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India and others, AIR 1997 I SC 734
MC Mehta v. Union of India, (2002) 2 SCC 356.
Murli Deora v. Union of India, AIR 2002 SC 40 207
AFD & C Ltd v. Orissa State Pollution Control Board,] AIR 1995 Ori. 84
Page v
AIR POLLUTION AND THE LAW IN INDIA WITH REFERENCE TO THE

AIR (PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION) ACT, 1974
Nature never did betray

The heart that loved her.
William Wordsworth
It is well known that the earth does not belong to man but man belongs to the earth.
Whatever befalls the earth befalls the residents of the earth. To reap joy and lead a
healthy life, one needs to have a clean and healthy environment all around. But man
has been destroying that very environment very selfishly without taking its care. This
has lead to some drastic environmental damages which have forced us to think again
about our activities.
Air is the most essential requirement of human survival. Access to clean air, amongst
many others, is a prerequisite for public wellbeing. Since the industrial revolution in
the early 1800s, the use of renewable and nonrenewable natural resources has led to
large socioeconomic growth across the world. In the past century, its use has vastly
improved life expectancy, education, income and living standards. During the same
period, their use has also resulted in a threefold increase in our population.
Sustaining an everincreasing population with a demand for an improved quality of
life has meant that these resources are being used at unprecedented rates, an act that
has polluted our atmosphere. Simply, it has been an inevitable externality associated
with providing goods and services to a material society fuelled by human needs.
Air pollution is the emission of gaseous and particulate pollutants into the atmosphere
resulting from human activities, which have the potential to, directly or indirectly,
affect human health and well being. Apart from human health, air pollutants also
influence the earths climate, damage vegetation, reduce visibility, induce material
degradation and impair the ecosystem.
DEFINING AIR POLLUTION
Page 1
According to WHO, Air Pollution is the presence in the outer atmosphere of

substances or contaminants put there by man, in quantities and concentrations and of
duration as to cause any discomfort to a substantial number of inhabitants of a district
which are injurious to public health or to human, plant or animal life or property or
which interfere with the reasonable comfortable enjoyment of life and property
throughout the state or throughout the territories or areas of state.
The presence in air, beyond certain limits, of various pollutants discharged through
industrial emissions and from certain human activities connected with traffic, heating,
use of domestic fuel, refuse incineration, etc., has a detrimental effect on the health of
the people as also on animal life, vegetation and property.
The major sources of air pollution are fuels, coal, petroleum and industries.
Listed below are the major air pollutants and their sources:
Carbon monoxide (CO) is a colourless, odourless gas that is produced by the
incomplete burning of carbon-based fuels including petrol, diesel, and wood.
It is also produced from the combustion of natural and synthetic products such
as cigarettes. It lowers the amount of oxygen that enters our blood. It can slow
our reflexes and make us confused and sleepy.
Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the principle greenhouse gas emitted as a result of
human activities such as the burning of coal, oil, and natural gases.
Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC) are gases that are released mainly from airconditioning systems and refrigeration. When released into the air, CFCs rise
to the stratosphere, where they come in contact with few other gases, which
leads to a reduction of the ozone layer that protects the earth from the harmful
ultraviolet rays of the sun.
Lead is present in petrol, diesel, lead batteries, paints, hair dye products, etc.
Lead affects children in particular. It can cause nervous system damage and
digestive problems and, in some cases, cause cancer.
Ozone occurs naturally in the upper layers of the atmosphere. This important
gas shields the earth from the harmful ultraviolet rays of the sun. However, at
the ground level, it is a pollutant with highly toxic effects. Vehicles and
Page 2
industries are the major source of ground-level ozone emissions. Ozone makes
our eyes itch, burn, and water. It lowers our resistance to colds and
pneumonia.
Nitrogen oxide (NOx) causes smog and acid rain. It is produced from burning
fuels including petrol, diesel, and coal. Nitrogen oxides can make children
susceptible to respiratory diseases in winters.
Suspended particulate matter (SPM) consists of solids in the air in the form
of smoke, dust, and vapour that can remain suspended for extended periods
and is also the main source of haze which reduces visibility. The finer of these
particles, when breathed in can lodge in our lungs and cause lung damage and
respiratory problems.
Sulphur dioxide (SO2) is a gas produced from burning coal, mainly in
thermal power plants. Some industrial processes, such as production of paper
and smelting of metals, produce sulphur dioxide. It is a major contributor to
smog and acid rain. Sulphur dioxide can lead to lung diseases.
AIR POLLUTION IN INDIA

In India, air pollution is wide spread in urban areas due to rapid increase in urban
population, unplanned urban development and high demands for transport, energy and
other infrastructural facilities. The legislative control and judicial response to the
magnitude of air pollution and its gravity will be discussed herein.
Air pollution surveys toady point out that majority of air pollution in cites is due to
automobile emissions. Each day around 1000 vehicles are added on the roads of Delhi
and Bombay taken together. The AIIMS hospital in Delhi has stated that due to the
lead in fuels, dangerous levels of lead are found in the blood of young children in
Delhi exposing them to various serious health problems. No doubt in recent years
much attention has been paid to emission levels and cleaner fuels and these matters
are receiving very positive response from various high courts and the Supreme Court.
It is because of such awareness that mass transit systems like elevated rail lines in
Chennai, the subway in Kolkata and the Metros in Delhi are being promoted on large
Page 3
level. But still these steps are too little and too late, unable to keep in pace with our
population rate. Compared to private vehicles the growth rate in manufacture of buses
in the country is still very less. Poor infrastructure and limited capacity have forced
urban users to shift to private modes of transportation .which in turn increase the
emission amount and congestion on the roads.
Air pollution in India can broadly be attributed to rapid industrialization, energy
production, urbanization, commercialization, and an increase in the number of
motorized vehicles. Vehicles are a major source of pollutants in cities and towns.
Apart from the sheer numbers, other factors contributing to the increasing vehicular
pollution in urban areas include the types of engines used, age of vehicles, density of
traffic, road conditions, and the status of automotive technologies and traffic
management systems.
Some of the steps to reduce air pollution are as follows:
Vehicular pollution control in metropolitan cities and other cities deserves top
priority. Strategies which need to be adopted include the promotion of public
transport and mass rapid transport systems together with traffic planning and
management.
In addition, taxes on fuels and vehicles, stringent emission norms and fuel
quality specifications, promotion of cleaner fuels such as CNG, replacement of
two-stroke engines, and a strengthening of the inspection and maintenance
system.
Measures to be taken to control industrial air pollution include promotion of

cleaner technologies, strengthening of emission standards, introducing
economic incentives, and strengthening of the monitoring and reporting
system.
A comprehensive urban air quality management strategy should be formulated

using information related to urban planning, ambient air quality, an emission
inventory, and air quality dispersion models.
Strengthening the monitoring network and institutional capabilities would

facilitate an improvement in the enforcement mechanism
Page 4
Use of cleaner fuels such as LPG in households would reduce indoor air
pollution. Epidemiological studies should be undertaken to develop doseresponse relationships, which will help in developing appropriate air quality
standards
Economic instruments need to be put in place to encourage industries to adopt

cleaner technologies and other conservation practices and to discourage the
over-utilization of natural resources.
AIR (PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION) ACT, 1981

The legislature enacted Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 for the
prevention, control and abatement of air pollution. This enactment was on the basis of
the decision taken at the UN Conference on the Human Environment held in
Stockholm in June, 1972. Government also enacted Air (Prevention and Control of
Pollution) Rules, 1981 so as to implement the enactment. The Air pollution control
and environment protection in general is a comprehensive project that requires
concerted efforts by government at all levels. For the purpose of efficient and
effective enforcement of this law, it is necessary to set up an Adjudicatory Body
which should consist of legal as well as technical experts. Awareness and education of
the masses and stricter law enforcement remains the key to success.
The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981 (Air Act) was enacted on the
lines of the provisions of the Water Act. The Act is an instrument of the legislature
which has been enacted in order to keep a check on the pollution spread in the air, the
grievance redressal system that needed to be established and the formation of State
Pollution Control Board and the Central Pollution Control Board which give out
certain guidelines and limits that are allowed by an industry.
Few of the significant provisions under the Act are as follows:
Section 2 of the Act deals with definitions. Some of the important ones are:
Air pollutants is defined as any solid, liquid or gaseous substance

[including noise] present in the atmosphere in such concentration as may be or
Page 5
tend to be injurious to human beings or other living creatures or plants or

property or environment.
Air Pollution means the presence in the atmosphere of any pollutant.
Emission means any solid, liquid or gaseous substance coming out of any
chimney, duct or flue or any other outlet.
Occupier in relation to any factory or premises, means the person who has
control over the affairs of the factory or the premises, and includes, in relation
to any substance, the person in possession of the substance.
Section 3 and 4 of the Act lay down that CPCB and SPSB respectively shall be the
same as have been constituted under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution)
Act, 1974. Section 5 also provides for a constitution of SPCB in states where it does
not already exist. Section 6 lay down that the Central Board can exercise the powers
and functions of SPCB in Union Territories. The members of the SPCB shall hold
office for a period of 3 years and their tenure may be terminated in the situations
mentioned in Section 7.
According to Section 10, the board has to compulsorily meet once in three months.
This is an important provision in the respect that it has been incorporated to ensure
that adequate safeguards are taken at regular and not prolonged intervals.
Chapter III of the Act elucidates the powers and functions of the Boards. The main
function of Central Board, under Section 16, is to improve the quality of air and to
prevent, control or abate air pollution in the country. The board may also advise the
Central Government, plan and execute nation-wide programmes, co-ordinate the
SPCBs, organise and train personnel, collect, compile and publish statistical data, and
most importantly, lay down standards for the quality of air.
Section 17 lays down the functions of SPCB and their relation with the respective
State Government. But the SPCB have to lay down standards for emission of air
pollutants in consultation with CPCB.
Chapter IV lays down the methods to be adopted in order to prevent and control air
pollution. The State Government may, after consultation with the SPCB and by
Page 6
notification in the official gazette, declare air pollution control areas, prohibit the use
of any fuel in such areas and prohibition of burning of any material other than fuel. 46
Under Section 20, they may set standards for emissions from automobiles and Section
21 empowers them to put restrictions on use of certain Industrial Plants.
Section 22A further empowers them to restrain a person from causing air pollution by
operation of an industrial plant or other reasons, by making an application to a court
not inferior to a court of Metropolitan Magistrate of JMFC. Any person can also be
empowered to enter premises during reasonable hours to gather information, inspect,
take samples of air pollutants, etc. Section 28 lays down that State Air Laboratories
may also be constituted which will analyse these samples.
An appeal under Section 31 from an order of the SPCB shall lie to the Appellate
Authority consisting of 3 persons appointed by the State Government.
Contributions to the SPCB can be made by Central Government as it deems fit. The
Board shall also have its own fund which shall be paid for by the Central
Government47, and may also borrow money in the form of loans or issue of bonds
from the Central or State Governments48.
In case of failure to comply with the provisions of the Act, a person can be imprisoned
for a minimum 1 year 6 months extendable up to 6 years with fine, and the
continuance of the failure may lead to fine of 5 thousand rupees per day, and beyond 1
year may lead to imprisonment from 2-7 years with fine. 49 Section 38 lays down
certain acts and the specified penalties for the same. Section 40 says that in case of
companies, the persons responsible in charge of the company shall be held
responsible. Thus, artificial persons are also covered by the Act.
Section 42 extends protection to the Board and its members in respect of any action
taken in good faith. The Cognizance of offences under Section 43 by the court can
also be made by either the board or its members, or any other person who has given a
notice of at least 60 days to make a complaint of an offence.
46
Section 19.
47
Section 33.
48
Section 33A.
49
Section 37.
Page 7
Chapter VII of the Act also lays down various provisions for dissolution of the Boards
by the Central or State Government, as the case may be, if the Board is not
performing its functions as elaborated under the act.
JUDICIAL APPROACH TOWARDS CONTROLLING AIR

POLLUTION
In India the environmental law has seen considerable development in the last few
decades. Most of the principles under which environmental law works in India were
developed within this period. The development of the laws in this area has seen a
considerable share of initiative by the Indian judiciary, particularly the higher
judiciary, consisting of the Supreme Court of India, and the High Courts of the States.
The role of the administration, although a critical factor in the success of any
environmental management programme, has seen its share of problems of scale and
definition. The essence of the existing law relating to the environment has developed
through legislative and judicial initiative.
In recent years, the judiciary has played a prominent role in environment protection. A
series of judgment in relation to stringent vehicle emission norms, fuel quality,
phasing out of vehicles and shifting of hazardous industries have provided a great deal
of momentum to improve air quality. Judicial reaction towards prevention of pollution
is encouraging. Be it under penal law, torts, constitution or special statutes. The right
to healthy environment and healthy and fresh air is identified as part of the right to life
under Article 21 of the constitution.
The developments that followed the Supreme Courts order in 1998 which required all
buses in Delhi to convert to Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) are well known. At the
time, there was significant criticism of this order on the ground that it would be too
costly for both the Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) and private-operators to buy
CNG vehicles, thereby affecting the large number of people who depend on public
transport. As the deadline for implementation drew close in 2002, there was some
inconvenience caused to the general public on account of limited CNG supplies but
in the long-run the measure has succeeded in reducing the air pollution levels. This
only goes to show that sometimes judges must make unpopular decisions in order to
pursue the long-term objective of protecting the right to a clean environment.
Page 8
Environmental Jurisprudence in India made a beginning in the mid-seventies when

Parliament enacted the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. But
soon, there was a quantum leap with the amendment of our Constitution in 1976 and
incorporation of Article 48-A in the Directive Principles of State Policy and Article
51- A (g) in the Fundamental Duties of every citizen of India. Both these Articles
unequivocally provide for protection and improvement of the environment. Inevitably,
Parliament enacted the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and the
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. With this core group of three enactments, a
modest beginning was made by Parliament. Unfortunately, soft laws were enacted
(and they continue to remain so) at a time when strong legislation was critical for
environmental conservation.
Other important cases are:
THE TAJ TRAPEZIUM CASE
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India and others, AIR 1997 I SC 734
The precautionary principle came to be directly applied in this case for protecting the
Taj Mahal from air pollution. Expert studies proved that emissions from coke/coal
based industries in the Taj Trapezium (TTZ) had damaging effect on the Taj. The Agra
foundries, chemical and hazardous industries and the refinery at Mathura were the
major source of damage to the Taj. The affluents and waste of these industries led to
the creation of Acid Rain, which had a corroding effect on the gleaming white marble
of Taj. Industrial and refinery emissions, brick kilns, vehicular traffic and generator
sets were primarily responsible for polluting the ambient air around the Taj Mahal.
Thus some preventive steps were required urgently to prevent further pollution.
Looking at this, the National Environment Engineering Research Institute (NEERI)
gave its over view report regarding the status of air pollution around the Taj.
As a result, in this landmark case, Supreme Court directed to follow suggestions and
recommendations of NEERI, of shifting the polluting industries to an area outside
TTZ and setting up of the green belt development plan around the Taj Mahal to save it
from the effect of air pollution. The Supreme Court observed that:
Page 9
The main function of the central pollution control board and the state board is to
improve the quality of air and prevent, control and abate air pollution in the country.
In many cases, environmental protection means something more than the preservation
of the habitat. It may cover protection of historical monuments and cultural heritage.
Pollution may gradually efface such monuments into extinction. The supreme court
hardly had any hesitation to interfere in such instances.
The court observed that the atmospheric pollution in TTZ has to be eliminated at any
cost. They stated that not even one percent chance can be taken when-human life
apart-the preservation of a prestigious monument like Taj is involved. They further
stated that the environmental measures must anticipate, prevent and attack the causes
of environmental degradation. The onus of proof is on an industry to show that its
operation with the aid of coke /coal is environmentally benign. It is rather proved
beyond doubt that the emissions generated by the use of coke/coal by the industries in
TTZ are the main polluters of ambient air.
In a similar case to control air pollution in Delhi, in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India 50
and Others, Known as Industrial Closure and Relocation case, the apex court ordered
the shifting, relocation and closure of certain industries.
SMOKING IN PUBLIC PLACE
In Murli Deora v. Union of India51 and others, while prohibiting smoking in Public
Places, the Apex court stated that, Fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of
the Constitution of India provides that no one shall be deprived of his life without due
process of law. A non-smoker who is affected by various diseases including lung
cancer, or of heart problem, only because he is required to go to public places, he is
indirectly being deprived of his life without due process of law.
Realising the gravity of the situation and considering the adverse effect of smoking on
smokers and passive smokers, the Supreme Court directed and prohibited the smoking
in Public Places and issue directions to the Union of India, State government as well
50
AIR 1996 SC 2231
51
AIR 2002 SC 40 207
Page 10
as the union territory to take effective steps to ensure prohibiting smoking in public
places.
CNG VEHICLES IN DELHI
MC Mehta v. Union of India, (2002) 2 SCC 356.
For the people living in Delhi, pollution from thousands of automobiles was a real
health hazard. Supreme Court took the step to reduce this pollution on many
occasions. Among the various attempts, the decision relating to conversion of diesel
vehicles to compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles merit scrutiny.
In MC Mehta v. Union of India52, the attention of the court was focused on the delay
to convert diesel vehicles to CNG by the central government, thereby frustrating the
orders of the Supreme Court in MC Mehta v. Union of India53. The plea of the central
government that there is shortage of CNG supply as a major chunk of it went to the
industrial sector was met with the following observation by the court,
Not only is there no shortage of CNG as far as the transport sector is concerned, but
even if there be such a shortage, if crude oil can be imported and supplied to the
refineries for manufacture of petrol and diesel, there is no reason why CNG, if need
be, cannot be imported, so that it ensures less pollution.
The court categorically declined to give any blanket extension of its directions
contained in the aforesaid order. However, in public interest and with a view to
mitigate the sufferings of the commuter public in general and school children in
particular, the court made certain relaxations.
CONSENT OF THE BOARD
In AFD & C Ltd v. Orissa State Pollution Control Board 54, Orissa high court looked
into the different parameters of the directing power under the Air Act. In this case, the
secretary of the board issued a direction under s. 31- A of the Air Act to close down
52
(2002) 2 SCC 356
53
(1998) 6 SCC 63
54
AIR 1995 Ori. 84
Page 11
the petitioners cattle and poultry feed factory, and to shift the same to an isolated
place.
The measures are remedial and that is the reason why in case of an established
industry, consent of the board is insisted upon. However, the board can issue such
direction within the ambit of section 31A only on being satisfied that the industry in
question emits air pollutant by which there has been air pollution. There needs to
be finding to the effect that there has been emission of air pollutant.
Such a finding only can clothe the jurisdiction of the Board to issue any direction. In
the absence of any finding that the petitioners factory emits any air pollutant as
defined in section 2 (a) of the act, it was not within the jurisdiction of the board to
issue the direction to shift or close down the industry in exercise of power under s. 31A of the Air Act. The court quashed the direction for the closure.
SHORTCOMINGS
India still follows inadequate and outdated environmental laws. Further, various
factors that contribute towards poor implementation of environmental laws in India,
are:
Lack of appropriate skills amongst the law enforcement agencies.
Inadequate infrastructural facilities.
Lack of proper understanding of environmental laws.
Lack of coordination among the law enforcement authorities and officers.
Jurisdictional conflicts.
No initiatives are being taken to recruit law officers who possess knowledge,
skills and understanding of environmental issues and laws.
The tendency to centralize the decision making power and bureaucratized

structure hampers the process of proper law enforcement. The political and
bureaucratic intervention in day to day activities of the law enforcement
authorities affects and curbs their professional competence and efficiency.
Page 12
There are many provisions in the Air Act that are outstanding and promise to reduce
air pollution, like every citizen of India is vested with the locus standi to file petition
with respect to air pollution matters. However there are also few lacunas in the Act.
These are:
It does not make any provision relating to abrupt escape of lethal gases and is
restricted in approach, as it is applicable only in areas designated as Air
Pollution Control Areas. It talks about the ways to control air pollution but not
prevent it.
According to this act, SPCB is required to lay down emission standards for
Industries and automobiles. But in practise it is done by Police and SPCB does
not have any controlling authority over police and police cannot control
pollution. Therefore, this act does not have any integrated approach.
The Act also does not provide for compensated expedient remedy for the
disaster and hence fails in this aspect.
This act does not create any new liability or any new right. This is a negative
point in relation to individual or group of individual victims.
There are no provisions relating to monitoring and control of airborne

concentration of pollutants at the source as well as in the work room. The
statutes also do not prescribe the precautions to be taken to protect workers
against harmful airborne substance.
The Act suffers from almost same shortcomings as that of the Water Act. It
does not set time limit and prescribes negligible penalties and is silent on the
rights of the third parties.
Light pollution caused by high intensity signboards, neon advertisements and

their jamming light effects are not covered by the Act.
The Act does not talk about pollution through the medium of air. Hence,
noxious odours as are emitted by some industries, like breweries, leather
industries etc., are not covered under the Act.
Page 13
The Act grants discretion to each State Govt. to designate particular areas as
air pollution areas within which the provision relating to regulations of
pollutants discharges through permit system are to be applicable. It seems that
polluters located outside such air pollution control areas cannot be subjected to
regulations of pollution or be prosecuted for violations of standards laid by the
State Boards.
The prevention and control of air pollution has been given as an additional or
secondary duty of the (Water) Pollution Boards. This under-rates the
importance to control air pollution as there remains a tendency to attach
greater importance to the primary function.
The Air Act like the Water Act does not provide for an integrated approach to
check pollution, as the local and municipal bodies which are armed with
statutory powers for ensuring environmental purity, have not been integrated
into the national and State level enforcement machinery.
CONCLUSION
The Air Act is a good legislation and has shown the right path to be pursued in the
direction of prevention and control of air pollution. Nevertheless, the Act requires
some amendments. The Act should ask for public input, views and suggestions with
regard to controlling and preventing air pollution. It should extensively provide for
creating awareness about the subject in urban as well as rural set ups. The SPCBs
should be granted special rights and be allowed to take suo moto action against the
polluter.
The need of the hour is to act immediately and push for stricter laws for cleaning the
air we breathe. The vehicles should be made to comply with the Euro IV or Bharat
Stage IV norms all over India and not just the few selected cities. The industries
emitting pollutants in the air should be dealt with strictly. Also the pre-requisite of
setting up every industry should be a promise to sticking to environment friendly
operations. The technology in all the appliances such as air conditioners, refrigerators
etc. should be eco-friendly only.
When we throw it away, we must think again, after all there is no away.
Page 14
Page 15
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Khitoliya, R.K., Environment Protection and the Law (2009).
Page vi
CHAPTER III
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS: AIR ACT 1981 AND WATER

ACT 1974
Submitted by:
Naina Khanna 64/10
Sunakshi Sharma 59/10
UILS, PU
Page i
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS: AIR ACT 1981 AND WATER ACT 1974
SUBJECT
WATER ACT
AIR ACT
Year of enactment Act no 6 of 1974

Way/Reason for Resolution passed by 12 states
Enactment
under Art. 252(1)
1981
In consonance
with UN
Conference
on
Human
Environment held in Stockholm
in June 1972 & Air pollution
survey by certain National
Environmental
Engineering
Research Institutes
Amendment(s)
1978 & 1988
1987
Object
Provide
penalties
for Prevent air pollution; Provide
contravention of the provision of standards to maintain the quality
the act; establish Centre/State of air etc.
water-testing laboratories etc
Applicability
S. 1(2): 12 States which initially S.1(2): Whole of India
passed the resolution other State
which adopts this Act by
resolution
Definitions
S. 2(e):Water Pollution: means S. 2(b): Air Pollution: means
such contamination of water or the presence in the atmosphere
such alteration of the physical, of any air pollutant;
chemical or biological properties S 2(a): Air pollutant: means
of water or such discharge of any any solid, liquid or gaseous
sewage or trade effluent or of any substance 4 including noise
other liquid, gaseous or solid present in the atmosphere in
substance into water (whether such concentration as may be or
directly or indirectly) as may, or tend to be injurious to human
is likely to, create a nuisance or beings or other living creatures
render such water harmful or or plants or property or
injurious to public health or environment;
safety,
or
to
domestic,
commercial,
industrial,
agricultural or other legitimate
uses, or to the life and health of
animals or plants or of aquatic
organisms
Constitution
of S. 3(2): Chairman; Maximum five S. 3: It is similar to the Board
Central Board
nominated members representing constituted under Sec. 3 of the
Govt.; five nominated members Water (Prevention and Control
form State Boards; maximum of Pollution) Act, 1974.
three non-officials; two person
representing corpo./companies &
a Secretary
Page 1
Constitution
State Board
Terms
Conditions
Service
Members
of S. 4(2): Chairman; Maximum five

nominated members representing
Govt.; five nominated members
form State Boards; maximum
three non-officials; two person
representing corpo./companies &
a Secretary
and
of
of
Disqualification
Joint Boards
Functions
of
Central Board
S.4: State Pollution Control

Boards constituted under Sec.4
of Act 6 of 1974 to be State
Boards under this
Act.
S.5: Composition of State
Boards in State in which Water
Act is not in force - same as that
in the Water Act
S.6: Central board to exercise
the powers and perform the
functions of a State Board in the
union
Territories.
S.5: other than Secretary, term of S.7: other than Secretary, term
members for 3 years; for of members for 3 years; for
nominated members when the nominated members when the
term of their Govt. ends; eligible term of their Govt. ends; eligible
for re-nomination.
for re-nomination;
S.6: insolvent, unsound mind, S.8: Same provision as that
offence involving moral turpitude, under the Water Act.
convicted of an offence under this
Act, partner in firm carrying
business, apparatus of trade
effluents etc; hay head having
contact with the firm; member
abused his power.
S.13: Agreement by two or more No such Joint Board under the
contiguous states or Central Air Act.
Govt.; exercise and perform the
several powers and functions of
the State Government; provide for
consultation;
make
such
incidental
and
ancillary
provisions.
S.14: Composition of Joint
Boards.
S.15: State/Central Govt. can still
give directions notwithstanding S.
13.
S.16: advice Central Govt.; S.16: advice Central Govt.;
coordinate with State Boards; coordinate with State Boards;
provide technical assistance; plan provide technical assistance;
and organise, collect; compile and plan and organise national wide
publish technical and statistical programmes, collect; compile
data, collect, compile and publish and publish technical and
technical and statistical data.
statistical data, collect, compile
and publish technical and
Page 2
Functions of State S.17:

advise
the
State
Board
Government;
collect
and
disseminate
information;
organising the training of persons;
inspect sewage or trade effluents,
works and plants for the treatment
of sewage and trade effluents and
to review plans; down, modify or
annul effluent standards for the
sewage and trade effluents and for
the quality of receiving waters; to
make, vary or revoke any order -for the prevention, control or
abatement of discharge of waste
into streams or wells; establish or
recognise a laboratory.
Power to Obtain S.20: for enabling a State Board
Information/Give to perform its functions. make
Instructions
surveys of any area and gauge and
keep records of the flow or
volume and other characteristics
of an stream or well in such area,
and may take steps for the
measurement and recording of the
rainfall in such area or any part
thereof and for the installation
and maintenance for those
purposes of gauges or other
apparatus and works connected
therewith, and carry out stream
surveys and may take such other
steps as may be necessary in order
to obtain any information required
for the purposes
Restrictions,
Norms
S.24, 25: Prohibition on use of

stream or well for disposal of
polluting matter, etc.
Restriction on new outlets and
new discharges except with
statistical data.
Lay down standards for the
quality of air; collect and
disseminate
information
in
respect of matters relating to air
pollution;
device
effective
prevention.
S.17: plan a comprehensive
programme for the prevention,
control or abatement of air
pollution; advise the State
Government;
collect
and
disseminate
information;
organizing the training of
persons; to inspect air pollution
areas; lay down standards of air
pollution etc.
S. 20 23, 25: direction to

authority
in
charge
of
registration of motor vehicles
under the Motor Vehicles Act for
automobile emissions.
Any area the emission of any air
pollutant into the atmosphere in
excess of the standards laid
down by the State Board;
For the purposes of carrying out
the functions entrusted to it, the
State Board or any officer
empowered by it in that behalf
may call for nay information
(including information regarding
the types of are pollutants
emitted into the atmosphere and
the level of the emission of such
air pollutions).
S. 21, 22, 22-A: Consent of
State Board required before
establishing or operating any
industrial plant in air pollution
area, follow further norms of
Page 3
previous consent of the State

Board.
Power to
Sample
take
installation and operation.

No excess discharge above the
standards lay down by the State
Board.
If apprehended by Board that
emission of any air pollutant, in
excess of the standards laid
down is likely to occur by an
industrial plant or otherwise in
any air pollution control area,
the Board may make an
application to a Court, not
inferior to that of a Metropolitan
Magistrate
or
a
Judicial
Magistrate of the first class for
restraining such person from
emitting such air pollutant.
S. 21, 22: For the purpose of No sampling under the Act.
analysis samples of water from
any stream or well or samples of
any sewage or trade effluent
which is passing from any plant
or vessel or from or over any
place into any such stream or
well;
result
admissible
in
evidence; procedure to divide and
store samples.
Submission of report of the result
of analysis on samples taken.
Power to Entry S.23: persons empowered by

and Inspect:
State Board to enter and inspect at
reasonable times to perform
functions,
ensure
the
implementation of the Act,
examine and test equipment,
industrial plant, record etc.
Provisions of Cr.P.C apply.
Laboratories
S. 16, 17: Laboratories to be
established
by
Central/State
Board
Appeals
S. 28: Appeal may lie from an
order of SPCB to an authority as
the SPCB may think fit to
constitute within 30 days
Contribution
appropriate
S.24: Persons empowered by

State Board to enter and inspect
at reasonable times to perform
functions,
ensure
the
implementation of the Act,
examine and test equipment,
industrial plant, record etc.
Provisions of Cr.P.C apply.
S. 28: State Air Laboratories
may also be constituted which
will analyse the samples.
S. 31: An appeal from an order
of the SPCB shall lie to the
Appellate Authority consisting
of 3 persons appointed by the
State Government.
by S. 34, 35: Central Govt. to S. 33: Contributions to the
contribute to Central Board SPCB can be made by Central
Page 4
Govts.
&State Govt. to contribute to

SPCB.
Government as it deems fit. The

Board shall also have its own
fund which shall be paid for by
the Central Government.
Borrowing Power S. 37-A: With consent of the S. 33A: SPCB may also borrow
appropriate Govt. the Board may money in the form of loans or
borrow by way of loans or issue issue of bonds from the Central
of bonds, debentures or such other or State Governments.
instruments.
Penalties
S. 41: for non compliance of S. 37: A person can be
S.20- 3 months + fine upto imprisoned for a minimum 1
Rs.10,000/- and for continuance year 6 months extendable up to
of failure Rs. 5000/- per day.
6 years with fine, and the
Failure to comply with S.33, 33- continuance of the failure may
A- imprisonment upto 6 years, not lead to fine of 5 thousand rupees
less than 1.5 year, continuation per day, and beyond 1 year may
may lead to Rs. 5000/- fine per lead to imprisonment from 2-7
day
years with fine.
If above failure continues beyond
1 year, imprisonment not less than
2 years and maximum 7 years +
fine be inflicted
Offences
by S. 47: In case of companies, the S. 40: Same provision as that
Companies
persons responsible in charge of under the Water Act.
the company shall be held
responsible.
Offence by Govt. S.48: Head of the Department is S.41: Same provision as that
Dept
liable when offence committed by under the Water Act.
a Govt. Department
Protection
of S. 59: Extends protection to the
Action in Good Board and its members in respect
Faith
of any action taken in good faith
Cognizance
Offences
S. 42: Same provision as that

under the Water Act.
of S. 49: Cognizance of offences by S. 43: Same provision as that

the court can also be made by under the Water Act.
either the board or its members,
or any other person who has given
a notice of at least 60 days to
make a complaint of an offence.
Page 5
Bar
Jurisdiction
of S.58: Bars the jurisdiction of S.46: Same provision as that

Civil Court relating to pollution under the Water Act.
cases in respect of any matter
which in Appellate Authority
constituted under the Act is
empowered by or under this Act
to determine .
Page 6
CHAPTER IV
NOISE POLLUTION AND THE LAW IN INDIA
Submitted by:
Salina Chalana
57/10
UILS, PU
Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1) Introduction
2) Meaning
3) Effects of Noise Pollution
Auditory effects
Non- Auditory Effects
4) Control of Noise Pollution
Non-Legislative measures
Legislative measures
5) Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000
6) Judicial Approach
Page ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Sunakshi and Ishrat with whom I learnt the spirit of team work and who were so cooperative and dedicated while compiling this project report.
Page iii
LIST OF CASES
Church of God (Full Gospel) in India v. KKR Majestic Colony Welfare
Association and others, AIR 2000 SCC 282.

Dhanna Lal v. Chittar Singh, AIR 1959 MP 240
Dwarka Prasad v. B.K. Roy, AIR 1950 Cal 349.
GIDC Housing Association v. Gujarat, AIR 1997 Guj. 221.
Kirori Mal Bishamber Dayal v. State of Punjab, AIR 1958 Pb. 11
P.A. Jacob v. S. V. Kottayam, AIR 1993 Ker. 1
Re Noise Pollution case, AIR 2005 SC 3136
T. Damodhar Rao v. Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad, AIR 1987 A.P. 171
Page iv
NOISE POLLUTION AND THE LAW IN INDIA
INTRODUCTION
With the advancement of science and technology at an unprecedented pace, the urban
centers of todays world have evolved not just in size but also in terms of the living
conditions provided by them. This has brought about an increasing new awareness
about the noise pollution, which has become a part of our day-to-day lives. Studies
have been conducted to trace the amount of damage caused by the noise from various
natural as well as man-made sources, especially traffic. In fact, noise has come to be
associated with the mental, physical, emotional and psychological well-being of an
individual, be it human beings or even animals. In legal terms, noise can be
considered as an assault on an individual. Apparently, this is a potential hazard to the
provisions of sound living conditions and needs to be checked at planning,
administrative and judicial level.
Earlier, the noise pollution was confined to a few special areas like factory or mill,
but today it engulfs every nook and corner of the globe, reaching its peak in urban
areas. However, the noise pollutions most apparent victims of today are the residents
in the neighbourhood of airports. It has many sources, most of which are associated
with urban development: road, air and rail transport; industrial noise; neighbourhood
and recreational noise. A number of factors contribute to problems of high noise
levels. These are, firstly, increasing population, particularly where it leads to
increasing urbanization and urban consolidation activities associated with urban living
generally leading to increased noise levels and secondly, increasing volumes of road,
rail and air traffic.
Although noise is a significant environmental problem, it is often difficult to quantify
associated costs. An OECD report in 1995 on the social costs of land transport
identified four categories of impact from transport noise55:
55
http://epa.nsw.gov.au/soe/ch1/16.htm#ch1.htm.OECD 1995
Page 1
a) Productivity losses due to poor concentration, communication difficulties/fatigue

due to insufficient rest;
b) Health care costs to rectify loss of sleep, hearing problems or stress;
c) Lowered property values;
d) Loss of psychological well-being.
MEANING
The word noise pollution has no where been defined in the Central Legislative Act.
However, the word Noise has been derived from Latin term, nausea and can be
defined as unwanted sound, a potential hazard to health and communication dumped
into environment without regard to adverse effect it may have on unwilling ears.56
Encyclopedia Britannica defines noise as, In acoustics, noise can be defined as any
undesired sound. According to this definition, a sound of church bells may be music
to some and noise to others. Usually, noise is a mixture of many tones combined in a
non-musical manner.57
The term Pollution is defined in section 2(c) of Environment Protection Act, 1986
as presence of any environmental pollutant in environment.
Section 2 (b) defines environmental pollutant to mean any solid, liquid or gaseous
substance present in such concentration as may be, or tend to be injurious to
environment.
Thus, Noise Pollution may mean disturbance produced in our environment by
undesirable sound of various kinds.
EFFECTS OF NOISE POLLUTION:
Effects of noise depend upon sounds pitch, frequency and the time pattern and
length of exposure. Therefore, depending upon the intensity and the duration of the
noise levels, noise has both auditory and non-auditory effects.
56
Re. Noise Pollution Case (AIR 2005 SC 3136)
57
Encyclopaedia Britannica, Vol. 16 at 556.
Page 2
Auditory Effects:
(a) Temporary Hearing loss- It is a reversible physiological phenomenon.
Temporary loss of hearing occurs when the ear is exposed for a short duration
to excessive noise or when the ear is exposed for a short duration to excessive
noise or when ear is exposed to the noise at damaging intensities for a
sufficiently long period of time.
(b) Permanent Hearing Loss- it is an irreversible loss of hearing and is caused by
either prolonged noise exposure of high intensity noise or it may be caused

when the intensity of the noise is more than 140 db. When a stage is reached
at which hearing loss no longer returns to the original level, it is called noise
induced hearing loss or permanent threshold shift.
Non- Auditory Effects:
These include the following:(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
Annoyance
Effect on communication
Loss of efficiency
Disturbance in sleep
Effect on Cardiovascular System
Effects on the nervous system
Hormonal effects
Effects on reproductive system
Increase in still birth rates and birth defects
Other health hazards including effects on skin and digestive system.
CONTROL OF NOISE POLLUTION

With the crossing of danger point for noise pollution, there is a dire need to take
some preventive and protective measures for its control. These measures include nonlegislative and Legislative measures.
Non-Legislative Measures:
(a) Proper designing and fabricating silencing devices and their proper use in jet
planes, aircraft engines, trucks, cars, motor cycles, home appliances, etc.
(b) Plantation of trees like Neem, Ashoka, which absorb sound vibrations to a great
extent, on both sides of the roads, around hospitals, libraries, etc reduce the
menace of noise pollution.
Page 3
(c) Use of loudspeakers and amplifiers should be restricted to a fixed intensity and
hours of the day.
(d) Noise polluting factories, industries, bus stands, railways and vehicular traffic
should be directed away or located far from the human dwelling and educational
locations.
(e) General awareness should be developed among the people to sound through
various means of communication so that there is minimum noise pollution in the
environment.
(f) The District Administration and the Statutory Bodies like state Pollution Control
Board should work out the modalities to prevent catastrophic effect of noise
pollution by insuring strict compliance with the statutory provisions.
Legislative Measures:
Law is a regulator of the human conduct and thus through legislative means; we can
regulate the human conduct to reduce the man made causes of noise pollution.
Different countries of the World have enacted different legislations to control noise
pollution. Till very recently there was no specific law in India to deal with the
problem of noise pollution. Although the Environment Protection Act, 1986
empowers the Central Government to frame rules prescribing the maximum possible
limits of noise in different areas, it took more than a decade before rules were framed.
In February 2000, the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules were frames.
(a) Law of Torts and Noise Control. -Noise in India is actionable under the law of
torts. Under this, if noise affects a persons comfort then it would amount to
nuisance and appropriate relief available either in the form of damages or by of
injunction would be given. In the case of Dhanna Lal v. Chittar Singh,58 the High
Court of Madhya Pradesh summarized the law relating to nuisance caused by
noise pollution as follows:Constant noise, if abnormal or unusual, can be actionable nuisance if it interferes
with personal comfort.

The standard of comfort is actual local standard and not the ideal or absolute
standards.
The right to commit a private nuisance can, in certain circumstances, be acquired
either by prescription or by the authority of a statute.
58
AIR 1959 M.P. 240.
Page 4
Actual and adequate relief would be granted if injunction as damages in

monetary terms cannot afford plaintiffs adequate relief.
(b) Criminal Law and Noise Pollution.1) Indian Penal Code- Provisions under Sec. 268 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860,
noise is actionable as public nuisance and thus there is a criminal liability of
a person relating to his illegal omission resulting in common injury,
annoyance, danger to public at large. People who by any offensive means
corrupt the air or by any means cause loud and continued noise and thereby
cause injury or annoyance to those dwelling in the neighborhood in respect of
their health or comfort and convenience or living are liable to prosecution for
causing public nuisance. Noise nuisance can also be punishable under the
provisions of Sec. 290 of the code, which prescribes a punishment, which may
extend to two hundred rupees, for those cases of nuisance not specifically
covered under the Code. Neither the right to make noise can be acquired by
prescription nor can it be accepted as a defence to a charge of nuisance.
In the case of Kirori Mal Bishamber Dayal v. State of Punjab, 59 the learned
High Court, while expressing the opinion about nuisance of trade and
business, held: Liberty to carry on any trade does not create any right to do so if trade
or bisiness desires another person of reasonable and comfortable use
of his property.
To determine whether a trade is nuisance or not can be determined
only after taking into consideration several factors.

Particular Trade or business may be lawful to start with but becomes
nuisance by reasons of changed circumstances such as growth of
population.
Nuisance action under the penal code is a poor remedy as it is nominally

punitive rather than preventive or compensatory.
2) Criminal Procedure Code- Provisions under the Sec. 133 of the Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973 the Magistrate has the power to make conditional order
requiring the person causing nuisance including that of noise to remove such
nuisance.
59
AIR 1958 Punjab 11.
Page 5
As such there is no direct provision to control noise pollution but chapter X,

Part B containing Section 133-143 and Part C containing section 144 provide
effective and speedy remedy for preventing and controlling public nuisance.
In Dwarka Prasad v. B.K. Roy,60 the Calcutta High Court considered the
problem of noise pollution under section 133 of the Cr. P.C. in this case, the
petitioner was running ice-making machinery in a shop. The respondents, who
were living next to the place where the machine was running, alleged that the
noise generated by working of the machine constituted a public nuisance.
However, the owner denied the allegation. The Magistrate passed an order
under section 133 restraining the petitioner from working this machine for a
certain period. The Court of Session confirmed the said order. In the revision
petition before the High Court it was held that no nuisance existed and
therefore, section 133 had no application because there was no evidence to
show the existence of nuisance and the evidence of some witnesses was the
evidence of opinion and therefore not admissible.
(c) Police Act, 1861 and Noise Control. - The Police Act, 1861 also deals with noise
pollution and punishment thereof. Under Sec. 30 of the Act, District
Superintendent or Assistant District Superintendent of Police are authorized to
direct the conduct of all assemblies and processions on public roads or in the
public streets or thoroughfares. They can prescribe the routes by which and the
times at which such processions may pass. Under the same section, the abovementioned police offices are also empowered to regulate the extent to which
music may be used in the streets on festivals and ceremonies.
Provisions Sec. 32 of the Act, (on conviction before a Magistrate), provides for a
penalty of a fine not exceeding two hundred rupees, for violation of the
conditions of any license for the use of music or for the conduct of assemblies and
processions, issued by the district Superintendent or Assistant District
Superintendent of Police.
(d) Aircraft Act, 1934 and Noise Control. -The impact of civil aviation on the
environment is evident in the rising public concern regarding noise, which is most
irritating and the most responsible element for the rising opposition to further
growth of aviation. The concern over the increasing noise levels from aircrafts
has been appreciated by the world aviation community.
60
AIR 1950 Cal. 349
Page 6
Under the Indian Aircraft Act, 1934 causing willful damage or injury is
actionable. Although there is no specific provision relating to control of noise
pollution from aircrafts but under the rule making powers confirmed by Sec. 8
(A) of Aircraft Act, 1934 and its supersession of the Indian Aircrafts (Public
Health) rules, 1946 Government can make rules to control noise pollution for
safeguarding health. Noise restriction regulations and safety regulations are
incorporated in the Aircrafts Rules.
(e) Motor Vehicles Act and Noise Control. -The Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 under
Sections. 20, 21j, 41, 68, 681, 70, 91 and 111A empowered the State Government
to frame rules regulating equipment and maintenance of motor vehicles and
trailers. Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing powers, rules, under
Sec. 70 may be made, governing any of the following matters either generally in
respect of motor vehicles or trailers or in respect of motor vehicles or trailers of a
particular class or in particular circumstances, namely:
(i)
The reduction of noise emitted or caused by vehicles;
(ii)
Prohibiting the carrying of appliances likely to cause annoyance or danger;
(iii)
The periodical testing and inspection of vehicles by prescribed authorities;
(iv)
and
The use of trailer with motor vehicles.
It is noteworthy that Motor Vehicles Rules made by various states do not contain
any effective control measures to control the noise pollution. To a certain extent,
use of 'horns' and silencers is regulated by the rules. The Rules certainly are
directed at curbing the noise but despite their presence the menace and the open
violation of the Rules still persists due to inadvertence shown by the state in their
effective implementation.
The Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 has been repealed by the newly enacted Act of
1988.
(f) Factories Act, 1948 and Noise Control. -The Factories Act, 1948 does not contain
a specific provision of noise control while it has been found in a number of cases
that high intensities, high frequencies and intermittency of noise are the factor of
annoyance for the workers. Such situations not only cause physical and
psychological damages but also impair workers efficiency resulting into their
giving low production and causing dissatisfaction practically to all. Section 11 of
Page 7
the Factories Act, 1938 provides protection from noise by making it obligatory on
the part of an occupier for keeping every factory clean and free from any drain,
privy or other nuisance. The use of word 'nuisance' in Section 11 may include
noise. Under section 89of the Act, noise induced hearing loss is mentioned as a
notifiable disease and it is the duty of manager and medical practitioner to report
it to the authorities if any worker contacts any such disease.
(g) The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and Noise Control.
-Prior to the 1987 amendments to the Air Act, 1981, the Act did not include in its
gamut the regulation of noise pollution. But after the 1987 Amendments noise
has been recognized as an air pollutant. The amended Sec. 2 (a) now defines 'air
pollutant' to mean any solid liquid or gaseous substance 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.
Hence the 1987 Amendment to the Air Act now specifically extends the provision
of Air Act, including increased penalties citizen's suits and the issuance of
injunctions by Magistrates, to control noise pollution.
The Central and the State Boards now exercise the powers and functions under
Sections 16 and 17 of the Air Act, respectively with regard to the prevention and
control of noise pollution including the laying down of noise standards. In
pursuance of the powers conferred under Sec. 16, the Central Pollution Control
Board has laid down noise standards during the reporting years.
(h) Constitution of India and Noise Control. - Apart from that Art. 21 of the
Constitution of India, which guarantees right to life, which includes right to a
healthy life61, the Constitution enshrined the directive principles in Articles 48A
and 51A (g) dealing specifically with protection and improvement of
environment. These are as under:
Article 51 A (g)-to protect and improve the natural environment including forest,
lakes, rivers and wildlife and to have compassion for living creatures.
Article 48A- Protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding of
forests and wildlife- The State shall endeavor to protect and improve the
environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country.
Article 19 (1) (g) provides the freedom to all citizens to practice any profession
or to carry any occupation, trade or business. But the said freedom is not absolute.
61
T. Damodhar Rao v. Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad, (AIR 1987 A.P. 171)
Page 8
No person shall carry on any profession, occupation, trade or business if it causes

nuisance, including noise, to other persons or to public at large.
NOISE POLLUTION (REGULATION AND CONTROL) RULES 2000:
The Central Government, in exercise of the powers under sections 3(2), 6(2) and (1)
and 25 of the Environment Protection Act, 1986, read with section 5 of the
Environment Protection Rules, 1986, enacted the Noise Pollution (Regulation and
Control) Rules, 2000, which came into force on July, 14, 2000.
Objective- The increasing noise levels in public places from various sources such as
industrial activities, generator sets, loudspeakers, etc have disastrous impact on
human health and psychological well being of the people. Therefore, it is considered
necessary to regulate and control noise pollution.
Rule 3- Ambient Air Quality Standards in Respect of Noise for Different Areas- These
have been specifies in the schedule as follow:
Industrial Area- 75 db (daytime), 70db (night time)

Commercial Area- 65 db (daytime), 55db (night time)
Residential Area- 55db (daytime), 45db (night time)
Silence Zone- 50db (daytime), 40db (night time).
Daytime- 6am to 9pm; Night time- 9pm to 6 am.
Silence zone is an area comprising not less than 100 mts around hospital,
educational institution, courts, religious places, or any other area declared by
competent authority.
The state has the duty to categorize silence zones areas.
Rule 4- Responsibility for Enforcing Noise Pollution Control Measure- State Pollution
Control Board in consultation with Central Government may compile, collect, publish
technical and statistical data relating to noise pollution and devise measures to check
it.
Rule 5- Restriction on Use of Loudspeakers/Public Address System- a loudspeaker can
only be used after obtaining written permission from authority. No loudspeakers can
be used at night except in closed premises for communication like conferences, etc.
But state Government may permit the use at night during cultural or festival
occasions, but not exceeding 15 days in one calendar year.
Page 9
Rule 7- Complaints to Be Made to Authorities- if noise levels exceed ambient noise

standards by 10db or more in any area, any person can make a complaint to the
authority.
Rule 8- Power to Prohibit, etc Continuation of Music Sound or Noise- If the
authorities are satisfied that it in necessary to give directions in order to give
directions in order to prevent, annoyance, disturbance, discomfort and injury or risk of
annoyance, disturbance discomfort and injury, may issue written directions to regulate
and control noise pollution.
JUDICIAL APPROACHPublic Interest Litigation for combating Noise Pollution and ensuring compliance
with permissible noise levels have come from 1950s but it is only till recent years
that courts have delivered judgments which are pro active as well as progressive.
Way back in 1952, the Bombay High Court, in State of Bombay v Narasu Appa
Mali62, asked authorities to regulate the use of loudspeakers during night when the
Ganesh and Navratri festivals were being celebrated. The Court ordered the strict
implementation of Environmental Acts, ruling that the means of celebration of
festivals must not disturb the peace and tranquility of the neighborhood.
In Dhanna Lal v. Thakur Chittar Singh,63the plaintiffs house was at a distance of8-9
feet from the flour-mill belonging to the defendant. The plaintiff alleged that the mill
caused unreasonable and abnormal sounds, causing the occupants of the house a lot of
trouble and thus amounted to nuisance. The defendant, however, took the defence that
he had sought permission and license from the Municipal Committee and thus the
noise, however unreasonable, does not amount to actionable claim. The High court
clarifying the distinction between Public and Private Nuisance held that the
reasonable noise comes under private nuisance and to be actionable it must be a real
interference with the comfort or convenience of the living according to the standards
of average man.
62
AIR 1952 Bom 82.
63
Supra note 4.
Page 10
In GIDC Housing Association v. Gujarat64, a writ petition filed by the residents of a

housing association complaining about noise pollution caused by an iron and steel
factory, the Gujarat High Court considered who came first. According to this rule a
person who goes to a place of nuisance cannot complain unless the nuisance began
afterward. Since the housing colony was within the industrial estate and was
established after the factory was functioning, the court held that the residents had
come to the place of nuisance, hence cannot complain.
In P A Jacob v. S. V. Kottayam65, the petitioner sought permission to use loudspeakers
at a public meeting where he proposed to denounce the practice of orthodox Christian
Sects which barred its members from marrying outside denomination. When the subinspector of police withdrew the permission apprehending that petitioners view may
cause public disorder, the petitioner approached Kerala High Court claiming that his
fundamental right to speech and expression was violated. Court held:
The right under article 19(1)(a) does not include right to use loud speakers or
sound amplifiers.
Right to speech implies right of silence and it implies freedom to not to listen
and not to force to listen.

Right to life comprehends right to safe and healthy environment, including
safe air quality and safe from noise.
In Church of God (Full Gospel) in India v. KKR Majestic Colony Welfare Association
and others66, the appellant was the Church of God (Full Gospel) (Church for short)
located at K.K.R. Nagar, Madhavaram High Road, Chennai. It has a prayer hall for
the Pentecostal Christians and is provided with musical instruments such as drum set,
triple gango, guitar etc. Respondent, KKR Majestic Colony Welfare Association
(Welfare Association for short) made a complaint to the Tamil nadu Pollution Control
Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board) stating therein that prayers in the Church
were recited by using loudspeakers, drums and other sound producing instruments
which caused noise pollution thereby disturbing and causing nuisance to the normal
day life of the residents of the said colony.
64
AIR 1997 Guj 221
65
AIR 1993 Ker 1
66
AIR 2000 SCC 282
Page 11
In the High Court, it was contended by learned counsel for the Church that the
petition was filed with an oblique motive in order to prevent a religious minority
institution from pursuing its religious activities and the Court cannot issue any
direction to prevent the Church from practicing its religious beliefs. It was also
submitted that the noise pollution was due to plying of vehicles and not due to use of
loudspeakers, etc.
Lower Court held that the welfare association was justified in its demands. The Court
directed the SP as well as the Inspector to take necessary steps to cut down on noise
pollution by taking action against vehicles that caused noise and to keep the speakers
of the Church at a lower level.
Impugned by this order the Church moved to the Supreme Court. After considering
the various contentions, the Court observed that no rights in an organized society can
be absolute. Enjoyment of ones rights must be consistent with the enjoyment of rights
also by others. Further, it is to be stated that because of urbanization or
industrialization the noise pollution may in some area of a city/town might be
exceeding permissible limits prescribed under the rules, but that would not be a
ground for permitting others to increase the same by beating of drums or by use of
voice amplifiers, loudspeakers or by such other musical instruments and, therefore,
rules prescribing reasonable restrictions including the rules for the use of
loudspeakers and voice amplifiers framed under the Madras Town Nuisance Act, 1889
and also the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 are required to be
enforced . Hence, the High Court has rightly directed implementation of the same. In
the result, the appeal was dismissed.
In Re: Noise Pollution case67, one Anil K. Mittal, an engineer by profession moving
the Court pro bono public. The immediate provocation for filing the petition was that
a 13 year old girl was a victim of rape. Her cries for help sunk and went unheard due
to blaring noise of music over loudspeaker in the neighborhood. The victim girl, later
in the evening, set herself ablaze and died of 100% burn injuries. The petition
complains of noise created by the use of the loudspeakers being used in religious
performances or singing bhajans and the like in busy commercial localities on the
days of weekly offs. Best quality hi-fi audio systems are used. Open space, meant for
67
Supra note 2.
Page 12
use by the schools in the locality, is let out for use in marriage functions and parties
wherein merry making goes on with hi-fi amplifiers and loudspeakers without any
regard to timings. Modern residents of the locality organize terrace parties for
socializing and use high capacity stereo systems in abundance. The petitioner sought
to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court so that there may not be victims of noise
pollution in future.
In this case, the Supreme Court issued the following directions:i.
The Department of Explosives may divide the firecrackers into two categories-
ii.
iii.
sound emitting and colour/light emitting firecrackers.

There shall be complete ban on bursting firecrackers between 10pm and 6 am.
The noise level at the boundary of the Public place, where loudspeakers are
being used shall not exceed 10 dB above the ambient noise standards or 75
iv.
dB, whichever is less.

No ne shall beat a drum or Tom-tom or blow a trumpet or beat or sound any
v.
instrument or use any sound amplifier at night except in public emergency.

The peripheral noise level of privately owned sound system shall not exceed
by more than 5 dB than the ambient air quality standards specified for the
vi.
area.
No horns shall be allowed to use at night in residential area, except in
vii.
exceptional circumstances.
There is need for creating general awareness towards the hazardous effects of
noise pollution. For this purpose, the need to add a suitable chapter in the
textbooks of children to sensitize them, role of a Resident Welfare Association
and service clubs, and special public awareness campaigns in anticipation of
festivals, events and ceremonial occasions has been emphasized.
Page 13
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 16 at 556.

http://epa.nsw.gov.au/soe/ch1/16.htm#ch1.htm.OECD 1995
Page v
CHAPTER V
ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION ACT, 1986
Submitted by:
Ishrat
89/10
8th Semester
Section - B
Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Environment (Protection) Act 1986

2. Object and purpose of the environmental protection act 1986
3. Power of the central government to take measures to protect and improve
environment
4. Fines and penalties
5. Critical analysis
6. Judicial approach to environment protection act 1986
7. Conclusion
Page ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Salina and Sunakshi with whom I learnt the spirit of team work and who were so cooperative and dedicated while compiling this project report.
Page iii
LIST OF CASES
Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India, (1996) 5 SCC 647

M.C. Mehta v Union of India and others, 1992 AIR 382
M.C. Mehta v Union of India, AIR 2002 SC 1696
M.C. Mehta v Union of India, AIR 1988 SC 1115
Kinkri Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh, AIR1988 HP 4
A.P. Pollution Control Board v. Prof. M.V. Nayudu, AIR1999 SC 812
Mahabir Soap and Guakhu Factory v. Union of India, AIR 1995 Ori 218
Centre for Social Justice v. Union of India, AIR 2001Guj 71
Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1988 SC 2187
Suo Motu v. Vatva Industries Asson, AIR 2000 Guj 33
Page iv
Environment Protection Act, 1986
We dont inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our chidren
-
Chief Seattle.
In recent years mankind's consciousness has been aroused very strongly about the
need for environmental protection and ecological preservation. It is of utmost
importance that the people should be aware not only of the problems involved but also
of the role to be played in protecting the environment.
Along with the peoples participation at the grass root level, the formal education
programmed should be provided and implementing various environmental protection
projects. In addition it is also very essential to develop environment friendly
technologies and renewable energy sources following the principle of conservation.
While developing technologies for the benefit of man, it is also essential to study
simultaneously their impact on the environment so that cyclic processes, which the
nature has devised for conservation of resources is not affected.
Since the sixties, the concern over the state of environment has grown. The decline in
environmental quality has been evidenced by
increasing population,
loss of vegetal cover
decline in biological diversity,
excessive concentration of harmful chemicals in the ambient
atmosphere and in food chains,

growing risks of environmental accidents and
threat to life support from systems.
Time to time various legislations relating to protection of environment from specific

types of pollution has been passed by the Indian legislature. The Environment
(Protection) Act, 1986 (EPA) is considered to be an umbrella legislation as it fill the
gaps in the existing laws.
OBJECT AND PURPOSE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT
1986
Page 1
The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 extends to the whole of India and it came
into force on November 19, 1986.After the enactment of Water (Prevention and
Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act,
1981, it was thought that there should be a general legislation for environmental
protection as well as for coordinating the activities of various regulatory agencies.
Need was felt to create authority with adequate power for environment protection,
regulation of discharge, handling of hazardous substances, speedy response to
accidents threatening environment and deterrent punishment to those who endanger
human environment, safety and health.
Following are the objectives of EPA, 1986:
To implement the decisions made at the U.N. Conference on the Human
Environment held at Stockholm in June, 1972.
To co-ordinate activities of the various regulatory agencies under the existing laws
and creation of an authority or authorities for environment protection.
To provide for deterrent punishment to those who endanger human environment,
safet0y and health.
To ensure sustainable development is also one of the goals of the EPA, 1986. If the
act is not armed with the powers to ensure sustainable development, it will become a
barren shell.
To enact general law on environmental protection which could cover uncovered gaps
in the areas of major environmental hazards as the existing laws generally focused on
specific types of pollution or on specific categories of hazardous substances and some
major areas of environmental were not covered.
In short, the EPA, 1986 aims at protecting and improving the environment and
prevention of hazards to human beings, other living creatures, plant and property.
POWER OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT TO TAKE MEASURES TO
PROTECT AND IMPROVE ENVIRONMENT:
The Central Government has the power to take all such measures as it deems
necessary for the purpose of protecting and improving the quality of environment and
Page 2
preventing, controlling and abating environmental pollution. Such measures may

include:
Co-ordination of actions by the State Government officers and other authorities
under this act or under any law.
Planning and execution of nation- wide programmes for the prevention, control and
abatement of environmental pollution.
Laying down standards for the quality of environment in the various aspects.
Laying down standards for the emission or discharge of environmental pollutants.
Restriction of areas in which any industry, operation or process shall be carried out.
Laying down procedures and safeguards for handling of hazardous substances.
Examination of manufacturing processes, materials and substances which are likely
to cause environmental protection.
Carrying out and sponsoring investigations and research relating to problems of
environmental pollution.
Establishment and recognition of environmental laboratories.
Such other matters as the Central Government may deem necessary of the purposes
of securing effective implementation of this Act. Under section 3(3), the Central
Government may constitute an authority or authorities to exercise powers and
perform functions as mentioned above. The Central Government is also having the
power to appoint officers to exercise powers and perform functions under this Act.
It is submitted that very wide power has been conferred under section 3(3) of the
EPA, on the Central Government to constitute any authority to exercise powers and
perform functions mentioned in the act. The Central Govt under this section can
implement the suggestion of the SC for establishment of environment courts which
alone should be empowered to deal with all the matters, civil and criminal relating to
environment.
The object and purpose of the act is to provide for the protection and improvement of
environment, could only be achieved by ensuring strict compliance with its
Page 3
directions. Therefore, the directions or conditions put forward by the act need be
strictly complied with.
The Central Govt. has also the power to make rules to regulate environment pollution.
The govt. in exercise of this power has already enacted The Environment
(Protection) Rules, 1986 which also came into effect on November 19, 1986.
OFFENCES AND PENALTIES:
1. Penalty for contravention of the provisions of the Act, Rules, Orders and
Directions:
One of the objectives of EPA is to provide for deterrent punishment to those who
endanger human environment, safety and health.
Sec 15 of the EPA provides that any person who fails to comply or contravenes any of
the provisions of the Act, or the rules made or orders or directions issued under the act
or rules, then for such failure or contravention, he shall be punishable:a) With imprisonment for a term which may extend to 5 years,
b) With fine which may extend to one lakh rupees,
c) With both.
In case the failure or contravention continues after the conviction for first failure or
contravention, an additional fine which may extend to five thousand for every day can
be imposed for a period during which failure or contravention continues.
If the failure or contravention continues beyond a period of one year after conviction,
the offender shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to
seven years.
2. Offences by Companies and Government Departments:
Sec 16 of EPA incorporates the principle of vicarious liability of the person in
charge, Director, Manager, Secretary or other officer, for the offence if committed by
the company.
Page 4
When any offence is committed by the company then the company as well as the
person directly in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business of the
company shall be deemed to be liable to punishment.
However, the person in charge of responsible for the conduct of business of the
company is no held liable if he proves:
a) That the offence was committed without his knowledge,
b) That he exercised all due diligence/ care to prevent the commission of such
offence.
3. Who can make the Complaint?
A complaint under this act can be made by:
a) The central govt. or any other authority by that govt. or,
b) Any person who has given notice of not less than 60 days of the alleged offence
and of his intention to make complaint to the Central Govt. or the authorized officer.
CRITICAL ANALYSIS
The title of EPA, 1986 gives an impression, that the law signifies a paradigm change
in emphasis from narrow concept of pollution control wider aspect of environmental
pollution. But a deeper scrutiny discloses the law has several missing links. Except for
two provisions, EPA does not contain any mechanism for carrying out wider objective
of protecting or improving the environment in a holistic perspective. Scientists
consider the definition clause disappointing. According to them, heat, radiation,
plasma, and organisms like bacteria are not included in the definitions of
environmental pollutant and environmental pollution. There is a provision in EPA,
1986 which states that if an act or omission under EPA is an offence under act, then
offender shall be punishable under Act and not under EPA, 1986. It is said that this
provision reduces the deterrent effect of this EPA. The requirement of a 60 day notice
seems to be unnecessary for filing a complaint by private party.
This is why EPA has been compared with a barking dog that never bites or with a
cobra which, though seemingly fierce raising its head, has no venom in his fangs
when its jaws are open.
Page 5
Darryl D Monte68
JUDICIAL APPROACH TO ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION ACT 1986

Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India,69
Pollution was being caused by enormous discharge of untreated effluent by the
tanneries and other industries in the State of Tamil Nadu . The tanneries were
discharging untreated effluent into agricultural fields to, road-Sides, Water ways and
open lands. The untreated effluent was finally discharged in river Palar which was the
main source of water supply to the residents of the area. According to the petitioner
the entire surface and sub-soil water of river Palar had been polluted resulting in non
availability Potable water to the residents of the area. Also, that the tanneries in the
State of Tamil Nadu have caused environmental degradation in the area. According to
the preliminary survey made by the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Research
Centre Vellore nearly 35,000 hectares of agricultural land in the Tanneries Belt, had
become either partially or totally unfit for cultivation. It had been further stated in the
petition that the tanneries use about 170 types of chemicals in the chrome tanning
processes.
The Supreme Court in the above case observed:
The main purpose of the (Environment) Act is to create an authority or authorities
under section 3(3) of the Act with adequate power to control pollution and protect the
environment. It is pity that till date no authority has been constituted by the Central
Government. The work which is required to be done by an authority in terms of
section 3(3) read with other provisions of the Act is done by this court and the other
courts in the country. It is high time that the central government realises its
responsibility and the statutory duty to protect the disregarding environment in the
country.70
Thus, the court directed the central government to constitute an authority and confer
on this authority all powers necessary to deal with the situation created by tanneries
68
Environment Law has no Teeth, The Indian Express.
69
(1996) 5 SCC 647. (popularly known as T.N. Tanneries Case).
70
Id., at 665.
Page 6
and other polluting industries in the State of Tamil Nadu. The Court further directed
that the authority so constituted shall implement the precautionary principle and the
polluter pays principle.71
M.C. Mehta v Union of India and others,72
Application in public interest had been filed by a practising advocate who had
consistently been taking interesting matters relating to environment and pollution. The
reliefs claimed in this application under Article 32 of the Constitution are for issuing
appropriate directions to cinema exhibition halls to exhibit slides containing
information and messages on environment free of cost: directions for spread of
information relating to environment in national and regional languages and for
broadcast thereof on the All India Radio and exposure thereof on the television in
regular and short term programmes with a view to educating the people of India about
their social obligation in the matter of the upkeep of up the environment in proper
shape and making them alive to their obligation not to act as polluting growth of
awareness. agencies or factors." There is also a prayer that environment should be
made a compulsory subject in schools and colleges in a graded system so that there
would be a general
The Supreme Court accepted the prayers in principle and issued directions to that
effect holding that keeping the citizens informed is an obligation of the Government.
M.C. Mehta v Union of India,73
To protect the health of the present and future generation and protect and improve the
environment, the non-CNG-buses were phased out and ordered for the use of CNGbuses.
M.C. Mehta v Union of India 74
71
Id., at 667-668.
72
1992 AIR 382.
73
AIR 2002 SC 1696.
74
AIR 1988 SC 1115
Page 7
Discharge or emittance or permission to discharge or emit of any environmental

pollutant in excess of standards is strictly prohibited. The Supreme Court has issued
directions to the concerned authorities to control and prevent the pollution of Ganga
water at Kanpur, inter alia, being (a) prevention from waste gathered at the dairies.
(b) enlargement of sewers and construction of sewers where absent. (c) provision for
public latrines to avoid use of open land. (d) High Courts should not ordinarily stay
criminal proceedings in such matters. (e) Corpses or Half cremated bodies are not
thrown in the river. (f) new industries to get licences only after making provision for
treatment of effluents and immediate action against existing polluting industries. (g)
Central Government to include environment as a subject in educational institutions.
(h) people should be made aware of the environmental problems.
Kinkri Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh,75
The petitioners have instituted the present petition seeking the reliefs, inter alia, that
the mining lease for the excavation of limestone from Khasra No. 2107/1979/1 situate
in village Sangrah, Tehsil Renuka, District Sirmaur, granted in favour of the third
respondent by the first respondent (State of Himachal Pradesh) be ordered to be
cancelled, that the third respondent be restrained from operating the mines covered by
the lease in such a manner as to pose danger to the adjoining lands, water resources,
pastures, forests, wildlife, ecology, environment and inhabitants of the area, that a
Commission be appointed to assess the damage caused to the environment, ecology,
natural resources, inhabitants of the area and the right-holders of village Sangrah as a
result of the uncontrolled quarrying of the limestone by the third respondent and the
respondents be directed to pay compensation for such damage, that the State
Government be directed to prepare a scheme for treating the land, water resources,
pastures, forests, wildlife, ecology and environment and for repairing the damage .
It has been held that to ensure the attainment of the constitutional goal of the
protection and improvement of the natural wealth and environment and of the
safeguarding of the forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife and to protect the people
inhabiting the vulnerable areas from the hazardous consequences of the arbitrary
exercise of granting mining leases and of indiscriminate operation of the mines on the
strength of such leases without property, the court will be left with effectively by
75
AIR 1988 HP 4.
Page 8
issuing appropriate writs, orders and directions including the direction as to the
closure of the mines the operation whereof is proving to be hazardous and the total
prohibition of the grant or renewal of mining leases till the Government evolves a
long-term plan based on a scientific study with a view to regulating the exploitation of
the minerals in the State without detriments to the environment, ecology, the natural
wealth and resources and the local population. However, the need for judicial
intervention may not arise even in those cases where the courts jurisdiction is
invoked if the administration takes preventive remedial and curative measures
meanwhile.
A.P. Pollution Control Board v. Prof. M.V. Nayudu,76
It is open to the authority empowered by the Central Government, to inspect the
premises of the factory, call for documents from the parties or any other body or
authority or from the State Government or Union Government and to examine
witnesses, if needed. It also has the power to obtain data or technical advice from any
source.
Mahabir Soap and Guakhu Factory v. Union of India77
The appellant industry was situated in a thickly populated area and was discharging
untreated effluents resulting in pollution of water reservoir. The government of India
issued directions to close down the factory. Further directions were issued to the
authorities concerned to disconnect water and electricity supply of the factory. These
orders were challenged on the basis that directions had been given without giving the
reasonable opportunity of personal hearing and without specifying the time to comply
with the said directions. The court observed that there had not been any violation of
any provision of law and the government of India rightly gave directions under
section 5 of the EPA.
Centre for Social Justice v. Union of India78
76
AIR 1999 SC 812.
77
A.I.R. 1995 Ori. 218.
78
A.I.R. 2001 Guj 71.
Page 9
The court considered the question as to how effectively and meaningfully can the
requirements of public hearing, as envisaged in the notification, be compiled. In this
case the respondent contended that the hearing envisaged in the said notification is
different from an adjudicatory process. Once, they have lodged objections, members
of the public do not have any right to demand copies of documents or ask for further
hearing. The court disagreed with this argument of the respondent and laid emphasis
on the right of objectors to prefer an appeal against the order granting environmental
clearance under National Environment Appellate Authority Act, 1997. The Court
observed that the power to provide public hearing is a power coupled with a duty to
give copies of the summary of the of the project as well as the minutes of the meaning
of the public hearing to the participants. The high court, in order to make public
hearing effective and not to reduce it to paper meetings, issued the following
directions:
i)
The plea of public hearing shall be as near as possible to the proposed site
and not far away from the headquarters of the Tulk where the site is
ii)
proposed.
Notice of pubic hearing should be published at least in two newspapers,
which have wide circulation in the region. The local government in the
area should also be asked to give big publicity to the notice. The notice
iii)
should be minimum 30 days period.

The executive summary of the project should be made available at all local
places at least thirty days prior to the date of public hearing. The summary
of environment assessment report in the local language should also be
iv)
made available on demand to the concerned person.

The quorum of hearing panel should be one half of the total membership.
It should have representatives from the board, the state environment
v)
department and one senior citizen and a nominated environmentalist.

The committee can decide such number of hearing as are found necessary
vi)
by looking at the impact of the project on the environment.

Minutes of the meetings of the hearing should be furnished by the board
on demand
as soon as possible. The central and the state governments
should publish the gist of clearance certificate in newspaper in which the

notice for public hearing was published there is nothing which prevents the
central government from charging any fee or expenses for granting the
Page 10
environmental clearance certificates or for supplying the copies of the

documents which may be demanded by the affected people or by the Nongovernment Organizations (NGO).
Its submitted that if the above said mentioned directions are observed in letter and
spirit then the local residents and NGO would get full opportunity to know how
the resources of the community such as water and land are affected by the
proposed project. It will also help them to know whether their suggestions have
been considered and placed before the government or not. Otherwise as the
awareness of the public would help in close and effective monitoring of the
project and as to how it works even after the Central Government has given the
environmental harm the citizens can bring that to the knowledge of the statutory
bodies or seek remedy from the court of law. It must be noted that environment
impact assessment is a must at the time of sponsoring the project or approving it
whether or not it is inter-state or intra state.79
Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of Uttar Pradesh,80
In a writ petition filed in 1983, i.e., more than 3 years before the commencement
of the Environment Protection Act, 1986 the Supreme Court has held that the Act
does not purport to/or perhaps could not-take away the jurisdiction of the Supreme
Court to deal with such case. Ordinarily the court would not entertain a dispute for
the adjudication of which a special provision has been made by law but the rule is
not attracted in the instant case. Besides it is a rule of practice and prudence and
not one of jurisdiction.
Suo Motu v. Vatva Industries Asson81
it was held that the pollution control board and its officers are free and competent
to take action against any person on violating any provisions of the environmental
laws. They need not wait for any direction of the court for taking action under the
law.
79
Id,. At 87-89.
80
AIR 1988 SC 2187.
81
A.I.R. 2000 Guj. 33.
Page 11
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, environment pollution is affecting not only individual but also entire
countries all over the world. The awareness towards improving the quality of
environment has increased substantially and all efforts are being made at different
levels to minimize environmental pollution and thus help in improving the quality of
life.
Management of environment means the proper utilization, conservation, preservation,
control and recycling of the resources for maintaining a balanced ecosystems. The
main focus of environment management is, thus, to avoid the over-use, misuse and
abuse of the natural resources.
The effective environmental management is the optimum allocation of finite resources
among the various possible uses and it has to be based on scientific and technological
approach which takes full note of socioeconomic parameters and compulsions.
Environmental management is an interdisciplinary approach to resource conservation
and it acts as a regulatory force on human wantonness in resource wasting.
In India the Twelfth Five Year Plan has emphasized the need for sound environmental
management which includes environmental planning, protection, monitoring,
assessment, research, education, and conservation as major guiding factors for
national development.
Environmental pollution is a world-wide phenomenon; therefore, there is a need to
have a coordinated administrative structure from international level to national levels
so that the environmental problems may be tackled in a coordinated and co-operative
way.
Page 12
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS REFERRED

2) Khitoliya, R.K., Environment Protection and the Law (2009).
3) Nishtha Jaswal & Paramjit S. Jaswal, Environmental Law, 3rd Edn. (2013).
4) Rosencranz, Armin & Divan, Shyam, Environmental Law and Policy in India,
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, 2nd Edn, New Delhi, 2001.
1)
Page v

8th Semester-Down Group-UILS

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

8th Semester-Down Group-UILS

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

ENVIRONMENT LAW PROJECT REPORT

ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: ANALYSING THE

Sunakshi Sharma (59/10)

Date of Submission: 7th April, 2014

Water Pollution and The Law in India

With Reference to The Water

Comparative Analysis of Air and Water

Naina & Sunakshi

Air Pollution And The Law In India

With Reference To The Air (Prevention

Noise Pollution and the Law in India

Environment Protection Act, 1986

Environmental Law: Analysing the Major Indian Statutes

WATER POLLUTION AND THE LAW IN INDIA WITH

Environmental Law: Analysing the Major Indian Statutes

ANCIENT INDIANS WATER JURISPRUDENCE

WATER LAWS IN CONTEMPORARY INDIA

THE WATER (PREVENTION AND CONTROL OF POLLUTION) ACT, 7

Environmental Law: Analysing the Major Indian Statutes

Environmental Law: Analysing the Major Indian Statutes

A.P. pollution Board Case (2001) 2 SCC 62

Environmental Law: Analysing the Major Indian Statutes

WATER POLLUTION AND THE LAW IN INDIA WITH REFERENCE TO

By means of water we give life to everything.

All human beings have the fundamental right to unpolluted environment,

The State is obligated to preserve and protect the environment.

Environmental Law: Analysing the Major Indian Statutes

The industry cannot be permitted to continue, as a matter of right, in case it

Environmental Law: Analysing the Major Indian Statutes

Varma, Vikas, Legal Control of Water Pollution in India (January 2006),

Ch., Verses 46-49, at p. 78.

Ch. Verse56, at p. 79.

Environmental Law: Analysing the Major Indian Statutes

In contemporary India, water law is made of different components. It includes

Oxygen demanding wastes (domestic sewage, animal manure and some

Disease causing agents (bacteria, virus & parasites)

Inorganic chemicals & minerals (acids, salts and toxic metals)

Organic chemicals (pesticides, plastics, detergents, industrial wastes and oils)

Plant nutrients (nitrates and phosphates)

Segments (soils, silt and other solids from land erosion)

Environmental Law: Analysing the Major Indian Statutes

Heat (from industrial and power plant cooling water)

The main sources of water pollution are:

Sewage and Domestic wastes

WATER LAWS IN CONTEMPORARY INDIA

Khitoliya, R.K., Environment Protection and the Law (2009) at 123-25.

Environmental Law: Analysing the Major Indian Statutes

The Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sec. 277.

Environmental Law: Analysing the Major Indian Statutes

A.P. Pollution Control Board (II) v. M.V. Nayudu (2001) 2 SCC 62 at 79

Environmental Law: Analysing the Major Indian Statutes

Environmental Law: Analysing the Major Indian Statutes

See Sec. 2 (dd) of The Water Act, 1974.

See Sec. 2 (e) of The Water Act, 1974.

Environmental Law: Analysing the Major Indian Statutes

See Sec. 2 (j) of The Water Act, 1974.

See Sec. 24, 25 and 26 of Water Act, 1974.

See Sec. 18 of The Water Act, 1974.

Environmental Law: Analysing the Major Indian Statutes

the autonomyand over-ridding powers to enforce the laws.

See Sec. 4(2) (a) of The Water Act, 1974.

Environmental Law: Analysing the Major Indian Statutes