Author: Inderjeet Kaur

Introduction

Every winter, Delhi and its neighboring states face a familiar enemy: toxic smog. The frequent crossing of the Air Quality Index (AQI) beyond the “severe” mark, the shutting down of schools, and the rise in respiratory diseases reported by hospitals are all part of this continuum. This phenomenon, largely caused by vehicular emissions, industrial activity, and seasonal stubble burning in Punjab and Haryana, highlights the gap between environmental law and its enforcement.

India’s legal system guarantees its citizens the right to a clean environment, which is part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. Furthermore, the State and citizens are enjoined to protect and improve the natural environment under Articles 48A and 51A(g). Yet, despite this constitutional commitment, air pollution continues to endanger millions of lives. This article analyses the legal framework addressing air pollution in North India, the role of the judiciary and the National Green Tribunal (NGT), and the need for stronger enforcement and accountability.

Legal Framework Governing Air Pollution

1. The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981

This Act was enacted to implement the 1972 Stockholm Conference, of which India was a signatory. India’s anti-pollution regime was first established through this Act. Central and State Pollution Control Boards (CPCB and SPCBs) have been established to monitor, advise, and enforce air quality standards. Sections 16 and 17 provide the powers and functions of the CPCB and SPCBs. Section 19 lays down the power of the State Government to declare air pollution control areas. Industries must obtain consent to operate according to Section 21. It also provides penalties for non-compliance, including imprisonment and fines, under Sections 37 to 39.

Despite its robust design, its enforcement remains weak. There is a shortage of staff in SPCBs, inadequate equipment, and often limited political support. Many industrial units continue operations without consent or monitoring, undermining the deterrent effect of the law intended by this Act.

2. The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986

The Act of 1986 serves as an umbrella legislation that empowers the Central Government under Section 3(3) to take all measures necessary for environmental protection. Subordinate rules have been framed on the lines of this Act, such as the Air Quality Standards (1987), Solid Waste Management Rules (2016), and the Emission Norms for Vehicles and Industries.

The government has the power under the Act to issue binding directions, including the closure or regulation of polluting units, but implementation again depends on inter-departmental coordination.

3. The Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) Act, 2021

Recently, the government recognized the failure of fragmented mechanisms under earlier laws; therefore, Parliament enacted the CAQM Act, 2021. This Act created a permanent body to oversee the air quality in the National Capital Region (NCR) and adjoining states. This Commission coordinates between multiple states, ministries, and agencies. It has the power to issue directions, impose penalties, and prohibit activities contributing to air pollution, including stubble burning.

However, its formation is criticized because of its overlapping jurisdiction with the NGT and SPCBs, which leads to administrative confusion, thereby reducing its effectiveness.

Judicial Intervention and the Role of the NGT

1. Supreme Court’s Environmental Jurisprudence

The Supreme Court, as the apex court of the country, has played the role of a key defender of environmental rights. It has repeatedly expanded the scope of Article 21 to include the right to a pollution-free environment.

– In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1986–ongoing), several landmark directions have been issued by the court, such as the closure of polluting industries, conversion of Delhi’s public transport fleet to CNG, and restrictions on diesel vehicles.

– In Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar (1991), the right to life includes the right to enjoy pollution-free water and air.

– More recently, the Court has directed strict action against crop residue burning and construction dust in various pollution cases in Delhi.

Although judicial activism has filled enforcement gaps, courts are frequently criticized for taking over executive functions without sufficient oversight to guarantee adherence to the law.

2. Role of the National Green Tribunal (NGT)

The National Green Tribunal was established under the National Green Tribunal Act of 2010. The NGT is a forum specializing in disputes related to the environment. Through public interest petitions and suo motu cognizance, it has played a significant role in addressing the issue of air pollution. In the landmark judgement of Vardhaman Kaushik v. In the case of Union of India (2016), Delhi and the surrounding states were ordered by the NGT to implement policies to reduce industrial and vehicle emissions. 

The NGT ordered the control of construction activities and prohibited the burning of crop residue. Environmental compensation is imposed by the Tribunal on states and industries that are in default.

Although the NGT’s proactive approach is admirable, political resistance and inadequate follow-up procedures frequently prevent its orders from being carried out. Accountability is diminished because environmental compensation is rarely achieved.

Stubble Burning and State Accountability

In Punjab and Haryana, the extensive burning of paddy residue takes place which leads to the release of massive amounts of particulate matter (PM 2.5 and PM 10) into the atmosphere every October to November. This practice continues despite numerous administrative and judicial directives.

States have been instructed by the CAQM and NGT to support substitutes such as bio-decomposers, in-situ crop residue management, and financial support for Happy Seeders and similar equipment. Farmers usually argue that without sufficient subsidies, the alternatives are expensive and time-consuming.

Therefore, there is a need for cooperative federalism in environmental governance, where states and the federal government share accountability so that a balance can be maintained between environmental goals and farmers’ livelihood concerns. In the absence of timely funding, coordinated policy, and local-level monitoring, the crisis will continue.

Policy Gaps and Enforcement Challenges

1. Fragmented Jurisdiction: There is less coordination among the CPCB, SPCBs, NGT, CAQM, and municipal authorities. Additionally, they have overlapping jurisdictions, leading to chaos.

2. Political and Administrative Inaction: Environmental policies are often reactive rather than preventive. Policies fail to be implemented even though well-thought-out action plans have been made due to lack of accountability and brief political cycles.

3. Public Awareness and Participation: Citizens do little to reduce pollution. The authorities are not under as much pressure because there is no community-based monitoring of the situation. The AQI data presented to the public is also opaque.

4. Technological and Financial Constraints: Small industries and farmers do not have easy access to pollution control equipment, real-time monitoring stations, or sustainable alternatives.

The Way Forward

India needs to move toward systemic reform to increase the effectiveness and proper implementation of environmental law.

It must enhance enforcement mechanisms, which can be done by providing SPCBs with resources, personnel, and independence. The government must implement digital industrial emissions monitoring. 

Another measure is the empowerment of Local Bodies, as involving Municipalities in implementing waste-management and construction regulations will prove to be an effective step. It is important to encourage sustainable agriculture by offering direct incentives to farmers who implement residue-management technologies and ensuring that subsidies are paid on time. To improve accountability, a proper framework must be drafted to provide state agencies with performance audits and explicit responsibility matrices.

The most important factor is citizen engagement, which can be achieved by raising public awareness. This can be achieved through citizen reporting platforms, data transparency, and environmental education.

Conclusion

The fight against air pollution in India involves legal and governance issues. The weakest link in the comprehensive legislative framework is implementation. The issue has been sustained by judicial activism, but clean air regulations run the risk of becoming yearly rites due to the absence of accountability of institutions and collaboration of state machineries.

Article 21 of the Constitution provides the right to clean air as an integral component of the right to a clean life. The government should become more responsive and play a proactive role in pollution prevention rather than being reactive. At the same time, knowledgeable citizens are also necessary to realize this right, in addition to strong legislation and watchful courts. The haze over North India will continue to serve as a somber reminder of rights denied and promises not kept unless the law is implemented.