India's 40 years old 'Air Act', 1981, languishes in the present circumstances of Air pollution emergency in Delhi – National Capital Region. Comment on the effectiveness of law in the light of judicial and administrative mechanism.

The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981: A Brief Overview

The Act empowers the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) and State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) to establish and enforce air quality standards. Key provisions include:

• Establishing air quality standards for various pollutants.
• Regulating industrial emissions and authorizing industries to operate.
• Granting powers to SPCBs to inspect, monitor, and take legal action against polluters.
• Defining penalties for violations, including imprisonment and fines.

Limitations of the Act

Despite its provisions, the Act suffers from several limitations:

• Weak Enforcement: A major challenge is the lack of stringent enforcement mechanisms. Penalties are often insufficient to deter violations, and SPCBs often lack the resources and political will to effectively prosecute polluters.
• Outdated Standards: The air quality standards prescribed under the Act are often considered outdated and less stringent compared to international standards (WHO guidelines).
• Limited Scope: The Act primarily focuses on industrial pollution and does not adequately address other significant sources of air pollution, such as vehicular emissions, construction dust, and agricultural burning.
• Lack of Public Participation: The Act does not provide sufficient avenues for public participation in air quality monitoring and decision-making processes.
• Coordination Issues: Lack of effective coordination between different government departments (environment, transport, agriculture) hinders comprehensive air quality management.

Judicial Interventions

The judiciary has played a crucial role in addressing air pollution in Delhi-NCR. The Supreme Court and the National Green Tribunal (NGT) have issued numerous directives:

• Supreme Court Directives: The Supreme Court has ordered the phasing out of old vehicles, the implementation of Bharat Stage emission standards, and the regulation of construction activities. (M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, 1996 is a landmark case).
• NGT Orders: The NGT has imposed fines on polluting industries, directed authorities to control dust pollution from construction sites, and ordered restrictions on crop burning.
• Judicial Activism: The courts have adopted a proactive approach, often treating public interest litigations (PILs) as a means to address environmental concerns.

However, judicial orders often face challenges in implementation due to bureaucratic delays and lack of political will.

Administrative Mechanisms and their Effectiveness

Several administrative mechanisms are in place to address air pollution:

• Graded Response Action Plan (GRAP): Implemented by the Environment Pollution (Prevention and Control) Authority (EPCA), GRAP outlines a set of measures to be taken based on the severity of air pollution levels.
• National Clean Air Programme (NCAP): Launched in 2019, NCAP aims to reduce PM2.5 and PM10 concentrations by 20-30% by 2024 in 122 non-attainment cities, including Delhi.
• Odd-Even Scheme: Implemented by the Delhi government to restrict vehicular traffic.

While these measures have shown some limited success, their effectiveness is often hampered by poor enforcement, lack of public compliance, and the complexity of the pollution problem. The NCAP, for instance, has faced criticism for its slow progress and lack of adequate funding.

Mechanism	Effectiveness	Limitations
GRAP	Moderate - provides a framework for action	Implementation challenges, relies on reactive measures
NCAP	Limited - slow progress, funding constraints	Broad scope, requires significant investment and coordination
Odd-Even Scheme	Short-term - temporary reduction in traffic	Limited impact on overall pollution levels, inconvenience to commuters