Discuss the legislative framework for controlling air and water pollution in India. Highlight the key…

Question

Discuss the legislative framework for controlling air and water pollution in India. Highlight the key provisions and limitations of relevant acts.

Ghissu Editorial · Accepted Answer

India controls air and water pollution through the Water Act, 1974 and Air Act, 1981, which created CPCB and SPCBs and a consent regime, and the umbrella Environment Protection Act, 1986. Their impact is limited by understaffed SPCBs, persistent non-compliance and the 2023-24 decriminalisation amendments that weaken deterrence.

**Introduction**

India’s legislative framework for air and water⟦1⟧ pollution control includes key laws and institutions but struggles with enforcement, especially in rapidly industrialising states⟦2⟧ like ==Andhra Pradesh⟦4⟧⟦3⟧==. Despite these laws, pollution levels remain high, threatening public health and ecosystems.

**Institutional Framework and Legal Provisions**

1. **Pollution Control Boards and Consent Mechanism**: The Water Act (1974) and Air Act (1981) established CPCB and SPCBs to regulate pollution through a two-stage consent process for industries, requiring prior approval before establishment and operation to ensure pollution control measures.

2. **Environment Protection Act and Amendments**: The 1986 Act provides overarching powers to the central government for environmental protection. Recent amendments under the Jan Vishwas Act (2023) introduced fines replacing many criminal sanctions and delegated adjudication powers, sparking debate on enforcement efficacy and potential weakening of regulatory authority.

**Implementation Challenges**

1. **Capacity and Compliance Issues**: SPCBs face understaffing, lack of technical expertise, and financial constraints, leading to poor enforcement. ==Andhra Pradesh== audits reveal solid waste management deficiencies that add to water pollution, reflecting broader institutional weaknesses.

2. **Judicial Push and Fragmented Jurisdiction**: The Supreme Court has urged uniform enforcement of noise pollution rules⟦5⟧, highlighting judicial activism in pollution control. Inter-state river basins like Krishna and Godavari require better coordination among states, which is often lacking due to fragmented jurisdiction over water resources.

**Way Forward**

1. **Strengthen SPCBs and Harmonise Laws**: Invest in technical capacity, adequate staffing, and financial resources for SPCBs, and promote uniform adoption of amendments, especially in ==Andhra Pradesh==, to improve monitoring and enforcement.

**Conclusion**

Robust institutional capacity, uniform enforcement, and public involvement are essential to realize the right to a healthy environment and meet Sustainable Development Goals, ensuring cleaner air and water for all citizens.

Model answer

ఈ ప్రశ్నను ప్రాక్టీస్ చేయండి

కాలుష్యం & ఘన వ్యర్థాలు; ప్రపంచ సమస్యలు; పర్యావరణ చట్టం; విపత్తు నిర్వహణ విధానం; వ్యవసాయ విప్లవాలు43 questions

Ghissu