1

NEW LAW COLLEGE

SUBJECT:
Environmental Law
TOPIC:
Constitutions of Central and State Board, their powers and
functions of The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution)
Act, 1974.

NAME: SHREYAS NAMDEO

BANDGAR ROLL NO: 157 DIVISION: B

Date: - 15/08/2022

I have taken the above mentioned topic for my

F.Y.L.L.B Semester 2 Assignment.
 2

Index
Sr Topics Page No.
No.
1 Introduction 3

2 Definitions. 4

3 Agencies for controlling Water Pollution. 4

4 Joint Board. 7

5 Prevention and Control of Water Pollution. 8

6 Emergency measures in case of pollution 9

of stream or well.
7 Provision of appeals (Section 28). 9

8 Relevant cases. 10

9 Conclusion. 12

10 Bibliography 13
 3

 Introduction.
The government formulated this act in 1974 to prevent pollution of water by
industrial, agricultural and household waste water that can contaminate our
water sources. Waste water is with high levels of pollutants that can enter
wetlands like rivers, lakes, Wells are serious hazard to health.
Controlling the point sources by monitoring the levels of different pollutants in
one way to prevent pollution, by punishing the polluter. Individuals can also do
several things to reduce water pollution such as using biodegradable chemicals for
household use, reducing the use of pesticides in gardens, and identifying polluting
sources at work places and in industrial units where oil or other petroleum products
and heavy metals are used.
Excessive organic matter, sediment and infecting organisms from hospital waste
can also pollute our water. However preventing pollution is better than trying to cure
the problems it has created or punishing of under. The central government have set up
PCBs to monitor water pollution.
In the water act, 1974 which certain amendments in 1978 is an extensive
legislation with more than 60 sections for the prevention and control of water
pollution. Among other things, the act provides for constitution of Central and state
boards for prevention of water pollution, power to take water samples and their
analysis, discharge of sewage or Trade effluents, appeals, revision, minimum and
maximum penalties, publication of names of offenders, offences by companies and
government departments, cognizance of offences, water laboratories, analysis et
cetera. Next paragraph prevention and control of water pollution is achieved through a
permit or consent of administration, procedure, discharge of effluents is permitted by
obtaining the consent of the state water board, subject to any condition they specify.
Any person who fails to comply with a directive of the state cannot, however,
entertain in suit under this act unless the suit is brought by, or with the sanction of the
state board.
The Act came into force in 1974 and is applicable to the states of Assam, Bihar,
Madhya Pradesh, Gujrat, Haryana, Tripura, West Bengal, Jammu and Kashmir,
Rajasthan, Kerala, and the union territories. It could also be adopted by any state
through a resolution passed declaring to adopt the Act. The Water (Prevention and
Control) Act, 1974 was introduced to prevent and control water pollution and to
restore and maintain the wholesomeness of water for the establishment.
The Act also confers some powers to the established bodies such as the central
board and the state board to control pollution of the water bodies.
 4

 Definitions.
Section 2 of the Act contain certain definitions:
1. “Board “means either the central board or the state board.
2. Section 2 (e) of the Act defines what is pollution, according to Section 2(e)
pollution means any contamination of water or alteration of the physical,
chemical and biological properties of water or disposing of any sewage waste
in water which is likely to cause nuisance or renders such water to be
harmful to public health or safety or to domestic, industrial or other
legitimate use or harmful to the life and health of the animals and aquatic
plants.
3. Includes- watercourse (flowing or dry), inland water whether natural or
artificial, subterranean water or sea or tidal waters as the state may
prescribe from time to time.
4. According to Section 2 (b) Central Board means Central Pollution Control
Board.
5. According to Section 2 (h) State Board means State Pollution Control Board.

 Agencies for controlling Water Pollution.

There are two agencies set up as per the Act for controlling and preventing
water pollution namely:-
a. Central Board- Central Pollution Control Board.
b. State Board- State Pollution Control Board

a. Central Board- Central Pollution Control Board.

 Constitution and Composition (Section 3)

The Central Government through a notice in the official gazette has the
power to assign or set up a Central Board named as Central Pollution Control
Board. As far as the composition of the board is concerned the Central Board is
to contain the following members:

i. A chairman who has the knowledge or has practical experience in dealing

with cases relating to environmental protection. The chairman is to be
appointed by the central government only.
ii. Not more than 5 officials to represent the central government.
iii. Not more than 5 members to be nominated by the central government from
the members of the State Board.
iv. Maximum 3 members appointed by the central government to represent the
interests of agriculture, fisheries, trade or any other interest as the
government may seem fit.
v. 2 persons to represent the companies or corporations owned, controlled or by
the central government.
vi. A full-time member secretary having complete knowledge, experience
and qualification of scientific management and prevention of
environmental pollution.
 5

 Functions of Central Board (Section 16)

1. Advise the Central Government on any matter concerning the prevention
and control of water pollution.
2. Coordinate the activities of the State Boards and resolve disputes among them.
3. Provide technical assistance and guidance to the State Boards, carry out and
sponsor investigations and research relating to problems of water pollution
and prevention, control or abatement of water pollution.
4. Plan and organize the training of persons engaged or to be engaged in for
the prevention, control or abatement of water pollution on such terms and
conditions as the Central Board may specify.
5. Organize through mass media a comprehensive program regarding
the prevention and control of water pollution.

b. State Board- State Pollution Control Board.

 Constitution and Composition (Section 4)
The state government through an official notice in the Gazette has the power to
assign or set up a state board named as State Pollution Control Board. The
composition of the state board is as follows:
i. A Chairman who either has the knowledge or some experience in dealing
with cases relating to environmental pollution.
ii. Not more than 5 members appointed by the state government to represent
the government.
iii. Not more than 2 persons by the state government who are functioning
as members of the local authorities within the state
iv. Not more than 3 persons nominated by the state government to represent the
interest of fisheries, agriculture, trade and any other interest as the
government may seem fit.
v. 2 person from companies, corporations which are either controlled, owned
or managed by the state.
vi. A member secretary who has the knowledge, qualifications, and experience
in dealing with cases pertaining to environmental pollution.
 Functions of State Board (Section 17)
1. To plan a comprehensive program for preventing and controlling the
pollution of the wells and streams in the state and to secure its execution.
2. To advise the State Government on matters relating to prevention
and controlling water pollution.
3. Collaborating with the central board to train persons employed or to
be employed in preventing, controlling water pollution.
 6

4. To lay down, modify the effluent standards of sewage and trade effluents and
for the quality of receiving water resulting from the discharge of effluents
and to classify waters of the state.
5. To evolve methods of utilizing the sewage and suitable trade effluents
in agriculture.
6. The state Board has the authority to set up laboratories to enable the board to
perform its function efficiently, including collecting samples of water from
any stream or sewage or trade effluents.

 Powers of The State Government.

According to Section-19, the following are the powers of state
government:
1. Power to obtain information
According to Section-20, the State Board may make surveys, take
measurements or obtain information for purpose of performing functions under
this Act. Failure to comply with any directions un•der the Section is a
punishable offence under subsection (1) of Section-41.
2. Power to take samples
Under Section-21(1) A, the State Government has the power to take samples of
water of any stream or well or any effluent being discharged into such a stream
or well, for analysis. Under Section-22(4), the State Board further has the
power to obtain a report of the result of the analysis by a recognised
laboratory.
3. Power of entry and inspection
According to Section-23, the State Board is empowered by the State Govt.,
with the right to enter any place for the pur•pose of performing any of the
functions entrusted to it.
4. Power of Prohibition on Disposal of Polluting Matter into a Stream or Well.
5. Under Section-24:
a) No person shall knowingly allow entry of any poisonous, noxious or
polluting matter directly or indirectly into any stream, well or sewer or on
land.
b) No person shall knowingly allow entry of any matter into any
stream, which may impede the proper flow of water resulting in
substantial aggravation of pollution.
c) No person shall establish any industry, operation or process or any
treat•ment disposal system, which is likely to discharge any sewage
or effluent into stream or well or on land.
d) No person shall use any new outlet for discharge of sewage.
e) No person shall begin to make any new discharge of sewage.
 7

 Joint Board.
An agreement may be entered into by the state government of one state with the state
government of another state to set up a joint Board. Similarly, the Central
Government and the government of other union territories can also enter into an
agreement for constituting a joint board.
 Composition of Joint Board (Section 14)
A joint board consists of the following members namely:
i. A chairman who has the knowledge, experience, and qualifications in
matters relating to prevention and controlling environmental pollution.
ii. 2 members from each state government nominated by their respective state
to represent the state.
iii. A nonofficial appointed by each state to represent the interests of
agriculture, fisheries, trade or any other interest of the participating state.
iv. 2 members from the companies, corporations nominated by the central
government which is owned, controlled or managed by the participating
state.
v. A full-time member secretary who has the required skills, experience and
qualifications in science, engineering or management aspect of controlling
and preventing pollution to be appointed by the central government.
 Disqualification of Members (Section 6)
Section 6 of the Act mentions the grounds on which a member can be disqualified
from being a member of the board:
i. A person who is judged insolvent or has not paid his debts or has
compounded with his creditors cannot become a member.
ii. A person of unsound mind or who has been convicted of such an offense
which according to the central government or state government may
involve moral turpitude.
iii. If a person is holding any office of profit or is a salaried employee of any
company, firm which is connected with the board in that situation also he
can be a member of any board.
iv. If a member has misused his powers by virtue of being a member or holding
any position in connection with the board, then the central government or for
that matter the state government may disqualify that member in the general
interest of the public.

 Meetings of the Board (Section 8)

According to Section 8, in every three months the board has to conduct a
meeting and review all the laws and the orders implemented by it, apart from that it
also has to discuss the future plan of Action, if the chairman of the board thinks that
an urgent meeting is required to address a particular issue then in that case meeting
among the members of the board can be held at any time as prescribed by the
chairman.
 8

 Constitution of the committees (Section 9)

Section 9 permits the central or state board to constitute a committee of members
either from the existing members or totally new members who do not have any
connection with the company for the performance of the duties laid down in the Act.
Members of the committee shall meet at any time or at any place and shall
observe any rule or procedure as it may consider necessary for the performance of its
duties. The members will be paid fees, allowances for attending meetings and
performing functions of the board from time to time.
 Prevention and Control of Water Pollution.
According to Section 19 of the Act, the state board has the power to limit the
territorial jurisdiction of any order passed by it in matters relating to prevention and
controlling water pollution. This means that the orders passed by the state board will
only apply in the areas that are affected by water pollution .it is up to the state board
to determine which area is to be declared water polluted and which is not, this can be
done by making reference to a map or making reference to a line of any watershed or
the boundary of any district.
According to Section 20 of the Act, the state board also has the power to inspect
any land, conduct surveys or gauge in an area if it thinks fit for controlling or
preventing water pollution. It can also ask any company, industry to dispose of the
information pertaining to the construction, installation, and operation of its
establishment. Section 21 of the Act empowers the state board or any employee on its
behalf to analyse any stream or well for the purpose of preventing and controlling
water purpose.
The state board also has the power to stop any person to enter into any poisonous,
noxious or polluting matter determined in accordance with the standards laid down
in the Act. According to Section 25, no person is allowed to set up an industry or
start a new operation or processor to any treatment of sewage without prior approval
of the state board, the state board may grant him a notice of approval and only after
that he is entitled to continue or start a new business.
If a person starts a new operation before prior approval of the board, the board may
impose any conditions as it may think fit for not obtaining notice of approval. Section
27 of the Act gives power to the state board not to grant any notice for setting up an
industry or continuation of an existing operation. If the company has been granted
permission with some conditions attached, the state board has the power to review
those conditions which it attached before giving the notice of approval.

 Emergency measures in case of pollution of stream or well.

(1) Where it appears to the State Board that any poisonous, noxious or
polluting matter is present in -
a) Any stream or well or on land by reason of the discharge of such matter in such
stream or well or on such land or has entered into that stream or well due to any
accident or other unforeseen act or event, and if the Board is of opinion that it
is necessary or expedient to take immediate action, it may for reasons to be
 9

recorded in writing, carry out such operations as it may consider necessary for all
or any of the following purposes, that is to say,—
i. Removing that matter from the [stream or well or on land] and
disposing it of in such manner as the Board considers appropriate;
ii. Remedying or mitigating any pollution caused by its presence in the
stream or well.
iii. Issuing orders immediately restraining or prohibiting the person
concerned from discharging any poisonous, noxious or polluting matter.
iv. [into the stream or well or on land], or from making insanitary use of
the stream or well.
The power conferred by sub-section (1) does not include the power to construct
any works other than works of a temporary character which are removed on or
before the completion of the operations.

 Provision of appeals (Section 28).

Any person who is aggrieved by the decision of the state board made under section 25
to section 227, has 30 days time to make an appeal in the concerned appellate
authority as established by the state government. The appellate authority may consist
of a single person or three people as the government may think fit.
 Penalties.
1. If any person fails to comply with the orders of the board under subsection 2
and 3 of Section 20 then in that case on conviction he is punishable for
imprisonment for 3 months or fine or both.
2. If the person fails to comply with orders of the board under clause e of
subsection 1 of Section 32 or with subsection 2 of Section 33 then, in that
case, the person would be punishable with imprisonment for 6 months
extending to 6 years or a fine or both.
3. Apart from the above-mentioned penalties. Section 42 mentions penalties for
different kinds of Acts namely:
a) If any person removes, destroys or pull down any notice put up by
the board.
b) If someone obstructs the member of the board or any other person who
is Acting under the board.
c) If a person fails to produce any information as required by the member
of the board for the performance of his duties.
d) Or if he gives any information to the members which he knows to be
false. Then In all the above Acts if the person is convicted he would be punishable by
imprisonment for a maximum period of 3 months or fine that may extend up to
10,000 rupees or both.
 10

 Relevant cases.
The Parliament recognizing the importance of water free from pollution enacted
the Water (Prevention and Control) of Pollution Act in 1974 (Water Act, 1974). This
Act was enacted to ensure the wholesomeness of water and to ensure that with
industrialization and growth of cities domestic and industrial effluents and waste
waters are not thrown into the streams and rivers without being treated first. For these
purposes the act also envisages the creation of a Central Pollution Control Board and
the State Pollution Control Boards in the States. Although the main legislation
dealing with water pollution is the Water Act, 1974, most of the litigations have been
filed under the general criminal law or under Articles 32 and 226 of Constitution of
India. In the period between 1980 to 1990, there has been a massive increase in
pollution related litigations. In fact, just from 1990 to 1993, upto thirteen
judgements have been delivered by different courts on this issue.
A number of prosecutions against polluting industries have been launched under
Section 33 of the Water Act. In the Pondicherry Paper Mills case, the Madras High
Court ruled that the remedy under Section 33 was independent of the rights of the
Pollution Control Board. Regarding the nature of evidence in water pollution cases,
the Delhi High Court stated in the M/S Delhi Eonling Co. Put. Ltd. Vs. CPCB, 1986
that samples not taken in strict compliance with Section 21 of the Act are in-
admissible as evidence. The court made it clear that the sample of water must be lifted
from stream or well only in accordance with the provision of the Water Act. Such
technical requirements of the court only obstruct and dilute the essence of the Act,
which is to prevent water pollution. Taking note of this, the Supreme Court, in the
cases of Satish Sabharwal Vs, State of Maharashtra, 1986, UP PCB Vs. M/s Modi
Distillery and Mahmud Ali Vs. State, repeatedly ruled that technical obstacles in the
interpretation of the environmental law will not be allowed to come in the way of
prevention of water pollution. But implementation of this rule to its full potential has
yet to be done. An added feature of the present water pollution problem is the utter
disregard shown by the central and State Pollution Control Boards (PCB’s) in
launching prosecutions against polluters. In the Francis Barreto case of 1983 this
lackadaisical approach of the Central PCB was highlighted. Again, in Rajiu Ranjan
Singh vs. State of Bihar, the Patna High Court hauled up the Central PCB for its
absolute inaction and for dereliction of duties. In another case, Travancore Cochin
Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Kerala PCB, the Kerala High Court criticised the Central and
State PCBs for issuing conflicting orders.
The constitutionality of Sections 19 and 24 of the Water Act have been
challenged before the Rajasthan and Gujarat High Courts in M/s Aggarval
Textiles Vs. State of Rajasthan, 1981 and M/s Abhilash Textiles Vs. Rajkot
Municipal Corporation, respectively. However, both courts upheld the validity of
the provisions, stating that the power granted by these provisions was not unbridled
and did not violate Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India.
In most cases, the response of the courts has been to provide injunctive reliefs. In
addition, the courts have also repeatedly asked and ordered the polluters to conform
to the requirements of the law, failing which they would fact strict, deterrent actions.
 11

Regarding liability for pollution caused by erring industries, the courts have
normally ruled in favour of individual liability. In K.K.Nandi Vs. Arnifa bh
Bannerjee, 1983 the Calcutta High Court categorically stated that liability is to be
fixed on every person who is in charge of, and was responsible for, the conduct of
business of the company. Similar ratios were laid down in M/s Trans Asia Carpets
Ltd. Vs. Stare of U.P.. 1992 and J.S.Huja Vs. Sate. The law relating to water
pollution has normally failed to take into account the nature and uniqueness of the
water as a resource. But over the last decade, the courts have begun addressing larger
questions of the environment and, as a result, the right to potable water was
recognised, for example, by the Kerala High Court in F.K.Hussain Vs. Union of
India, 1990.
 The Haryana Canal and Drainage Act ~ 1974
The Haryana Government formulated a ‘rice shoot ‘policy which sanctioned
various new rice shoots. This was challenged by the petitioners in the case of Darayo
Singh Vs. State, 1992, under Section 17 of the Haryana Canal and Drainage Act
under which a new outlet can only be provided by preparing a draft scheme and in
this case no such draft had been made. The issue which the court looked into was
whether the procedure under Section 17 and 18 of the act has been followed in the
formulation of this policy. Can the procedural requirements be dispensed with? The
court held that ‘rice shoot ‘does not come within the definition of “outlet “as per
the Act, hence the policy was valid. The court also looked into the purpose of the
policy which was framed in the interest of the nation so that more rice was grown in
areas more suitable for rice cultivation. The court also laid down guidelines for the
sanctioning of ‘rice shoots’ to be implemented by the competent authority.
 Water Cess (Prevention and Control J of Pollution Act, I977.
After the implementation of the Water Cess Act, 1977 many industries have
challenged the imposition of the cess. These challenges required the courts to go into
various issues, namely, interpretation of the Act, nature of industry, nature of end
product, and so on. What is a water cess? The Patna High Court in the famous
TISCO case titled, TISCO Vs. State of Bihar, 1991, held that a cess imposed under
the Water Cess Act is by way of compulsory exaction of money by a public authority
for a public purpose. That court further stated that a cess is to be imposed for the
purpose of treating the effluent of the factory and other sewage so that the common
public may not have to use contaminated water or polluted water. The issue of
interpreting the Water Cess Act also came up before the Kerala High Court in the
Kerala SPCB Vs. Gwalior Rayon Silk Manufacturing (Weaving) Co., 1986, case.
The Hon’ble Court stated that rules that sought to ensure regulation of the release of
effluents into rivers are in the interest of the public and are therefore valid. In addition
they stated that mere installation of a treatment plant does not entitle one to rebate. In
other words the court ruled that the Cess Act should be construed liberally. However
the Supreme Court, in the A.P. Rayons Lid. case, ruled otherwise. Viewing the statute
as a fiscal one, that court held that it must be construed strictly. This was reiterated by
the Supreme Court in Rajasthan State Electricity Board Vs. Cess Appellate
Committee, 1991. Regarding the imposition of cess, it is quite settled that this would
depend on the nature of the industry. In Tata Engineering and Locomotive
 12

Company Ltd. Vs. State, the Patna High Court stated that while identifying the
nature of an industry, the totality of its activities and its dominant primary purpose
should be the guiding factor and not the mere presence of some incidental processes.
This test of “dominant purpose’’ is now the test that is followed to ascertain
whether the industry attracts the provisions of the Water Cess Act.

 Conclusion.
Water pollution is a big issue in India and controlling and preventing it is
another big issue, till now we are not able to create awareness among the people
regarding the importance of conserving water bodies, this Act certainly provides
various agencies that will look to prevent and control water pollution, the Act lays
down various procedures for filing a complaint and the powers of each and every
board. However more needs to be done and the Act should be made more
comprehensive, more participation should be given to the locals and punishments
should be made stricter so that it Acts as a strong deterrence. Above all these more
emphasis should be given on the implementation aspect as just by making laws you
cannot control pollution, proper implementation is also required.
The present paper has tried to analyse cases relating to water law and come up with
judicial trend which reflects the role of the judiciary, the scope of judicial activism,
the growing concern of the citizens, the development of PIL, the development of
various laws, the growth of fundamental right, and so on. The trend that emerges from
this study is that cases in the beginning of this century were mainly dealing with
criminal law and related to issues of theft, mischief and nuisance. Over time law
developed and the concepts widened. We see the scope of law of Torts widening,
though most of the torts cases were confined to certain specialised categories of water
like irrigation and pollution. The trend also sees the development of riparian rights
and principles. With the increase in urbanisation and industrialisation the problems
relating to sanitation and drainage also increased. This also led to the development of
municipal and administrative law and the attendant duties and liabilities of the
Municipal Corporations. Increased levels of pollution of the rivers and streams led to
the enactment of water specific legislations to ensure water as a source for drinking
water, for supporting fish life, for use in irrigation and to ensure water free from
pollution.
The courts have over the years held that it is the duty of Municipal Corporations to
properly maintain sanitation and drainage and that paucity of funds and staff is no
defence. This trend was started in the judgement of the Supreme Court in Ratlam
Municipal Corporation case and was later reiterated in the Ganga Pollution case,
wherein the court laid down that sanitation and drainage was to be maintained by the
Municipal Corporations and that untreated sewage and effluents could not be thrown
into the river untreated. Thus, the underlying basis that the courts have worked upon
is that the Municipal Authorities and other local bodies are under an obligation to
make arrangements for water supply and drainage. The two cases mentioned above
are landmark cases and marked the development of laws and the positive attitude of
the judiciary and the activist role that it played.
 13

Thus water law has developed from criminal to torts to Constitution as also
specific water related statutes besides the growth of administrative law. Judicial
activism has been very much the hallmark of a number of cases and and the concept
of rights has changed from mere riparian rights to easement rights, natural rights and
fundamental rights. However, the courts have not normally concerned themselves
with socio-economic aspects but have confined themselves to technical determination
of the cases. Nevertheless, there is a gradual but welcome change as enumerated in
some of the cases discussed in the paper. This judicial activism is perhaps the
beginning of what we would call the growth of the concept of Indian environmental
justice vis-a vis water law.

 Bibliography.
1. www.indiacode.nic.in
2. blog.ipleaders.in
3. www.legalserviceindia.com
4. Wikipedia.
5. Judicial Trends in Water Law: - A Case Study by Veera Kaul Singh and
Bharath Jairaf.