Pollution Control in India: Role of the Central and State Pollution Control Boards

India faces one of the world’s most serious pollution challenges. Managing air and water quality across such a vast and diverse country requires a robust institutional framework. That framework rests primarily on two pillars: the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) and the State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs). Together, these bodies are tasked with monitoring, regulating, and enforcing environmental standards across the nation. Here’s how they work, how they coordinate, and what obstacles they face.

How India’s pollution control framework came into being 🔗

India’s formal pollution control journey began in the early 1970s when the government recognized the need for a dedicated regulatory mechanism. The CPCB was established in September 1974 under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act. Its mandate later expanded with the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act of 1981 and the Environment (Protection) Act of 1986. Initially named the Central Board for the Prevention and Control of Pollution, it was renamed to CPCB in 1988 under an amendment to the Water Act.

At the state level, each state was required to set up its own pollution control board under Section 4 of the Water Act. Union territories, meanwhile, have Pollution Control Committees (PCCs) that serve a similar function. Today, the CPCB operates as the apex body for pollution control in the country, functioning as the technical wing of the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC).

Structure and composition of the boards 🔗

The Central Pollution Control Board 🔗

The CPCB is led by a Chairperson, typically an Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer appointed by the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet. The Chairperson is followed by the Member Secretary, who manages day-to-day operations, along with other members that include central government officials, nominees from State Boards, representatives from agriculture and trade sectors, and government company representatives.

The Board is headquartered in New Delhi and operates through nine regional directorates spread across cities like Kolkata, Bengaluru, Lucknow, Chennai, and Bhopal, along with a project office in Agra. The CPCB carries out its work through nine major project/budget heads covering pollution assessment, research and development, laboratory management, standards development, and more. It also maintains five laboratories and employs around 500 full-time staff including engineers, scientists, and environmental specialists.

State Pollution Control Boards 🔗

Each SPCB mirrors the central structure at the regional level but is tailored to handle local pollution issues. For example, the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board focuses heavily on industrial pollution from the Mumbai manufacturing belt, while the Kerala State Pollution Control Board addresses coastal and backwater contamination. Each board has a Chairperson, a Member Secretary, and members drawn from government, industry, and (ideally) technical experts.

However, research from the Centre for Policy Research (CPR) has found that the composition of these boards often skews toward potential polluters. Individuals from local authorities, industries, and public sector corporations account for about 52% of board members, while scientists, medical practitioners, and academics make up just 7%. This raises serious concerns about conflicts of interest and the capacity of these boards to make independent, technically sound decisions.

Key functions of the pollution control boards 🔗

Setting pollution standards 🔗

One of the CPCB’s most important roles is formulating national environmental quality standards. This includes setting emission and effluent limits for industries, defining ambient air quality standards, and establishing water quality benchmarks. The CPCB develops Comprehensive Industrial Documents (COINDS) and prepares manuals, codes, and guidance for treatment and disposal of pollutants. These standards form the baseline that every SPCB is expected to enforce at the state level.

Issuing industrial permits and consent 🔗

SPCBs are primarily responsible for granting consent to establish and operate industrial units. Any industry likely to discharge pollutants into water or air must obtain permission from the relevant SPCB. This consent process involves reviewing the proposed pollution control measures, inspecting facilities, and ensuring compliance with national standards. Without this consent, an industry cannot legally operate.

Monitoring air and water quality 🔗

The CPCB runs the National Air Quality Monitoring Programme (NAMP), which covers over 600 stations across more than 260 cities monitoring key pollutants like sulphur dioxide (SO₂), nitrogen dioxide (NO₂), and particulate matter (PM₁₀ and PM₂.₅). The Board also operates the Air Quality Index (AQI) system and the SAMEER mobile app, providing real-time air quality data to the public.

For water quality, the CPCB along with SPCBs maintains a nationwide monitoring network of over 1,000 stations covering rivers, lakes, canals, ponds, and groundwater wells across 27 states and 6 union territories. Surface water is monitored quarterly, while groundwater is assessed every six months.

Conducting research and awareness campaigns 🔗

The CPCB generates and disseminates scientific data, provides technical inputs for national policy, and organizes public awareness campaigns on pollution-related issues. It also conducts training programmes for personnel involved in pollution prevention and control. Between 2019 and 2024, approximately 1,400 public awareness programmes were conducted under the National Clean Air Programme alone, though capacity-building efforts remain limited with only 62 formal programmes during the same period.

Coordination between CPCB and SPCBs 🔗

The top-down guidance model 🔗

The relationship between the CPCB and SPCBs follows a cooperative federalism model. The CPCB sets national standards and guidelines, while SPCBs implement and enforce these at the ground level. The CPCB provides technical assistance and guidance to state boards, helps resolve disputes between them, and coordinates their activities to ensure uniform environmental protection across the country.

For Union Territories, the CPCB directly exercises the powers and functions of a State Board. This means it has dual responsibilities – acting as both the national coordinator and the regional enforcer in these territories.

Implementing national programmes 🔗

Large-scale national initiatives depend on CPCB-SPCB coordination to succeed. The National Clean Air Programme (NCAP), launched in 2019, is a prime example. Under NCAP, the CPCB coordinates with SPCBs and Urban Local Bodies across 131 non-attainment cities in 24 states and union territories to prepare and implement city-specific clean air action plans. Similarly, the Namami Gange programme for cleaning the river Ganga involves close collaboration between the CPCB and SPCBs of the five Ganga basin states to monitor water quality and enforce discharge norms.

Data sharing and technology platforms 🔗

Modern coordination relies heavily on digital infrastructure. The PRANA portal (Portal for Regulation of Air Pollution in Non-Attainment Cities) tracks the physical and financial progress of city action plans under NCAP. Continuous Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Stations (CAAQMS) feed real-time data to both central and state agencies. As of 2024, India had over 1,500 air quality monitoring stations, including 558 continuous monitoring stations and 966 manual stations covering 550 cities.

Challenges facing the pollution control boards 🔗

Severe staffing shortages 🔗

Perhaps the most critical challenge is the massive shortage of human resources. A report submitted to the National Green Tribunal revealed that more than 50% of sanctioned posts across all SPCBs and PCCs remain vacant – 6,075 out of 12,016 positions are unfilled. Bihar tops the list with an 84% vacancy rate, followed by Jharkhand at 73%. The Delhi Pollution Control Board alone had 233 vacancies out of 344 sanctioned posts when the Supreme Court flagged the issue in 2024.

This staffing crisis directly impacts the boards’ ability to conduct inspections, process industrial consent applications, and enforce penalties for violations.

Lack of technical expertise 🔗

Many SPCBs lack members with technical qualifications in environmental management. Research by Mongabay India, citing the CPR study, found that states like Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, and Uttar Pradesh have boards without any members possessing technical expertise in air quality management – a direct violation of the statutory requirement under the Air Act, 1981, which mandates at least two such experts on every board.

Leadership instability 🔗

Frequent changes in board leadership undermine long-term planning. In some states, Chairpersons have served for as little as 18 days (in Chhattisgarh), and Member Secretaries for just 15 days (in Haryana and Uttar Pradesh). Many Chairpersons hold the position on a part-time basis while serving in other government roles, which limits their ability to focus on pollution control. This revolving-door approach makes it nearly impossible to develop and implement meaningful long-term strategies.

Funding and utilisation gaps 🔗

Even when funds are available, utilisation rates remain low. Under the NCAP, approximately ₹11,211 crore was released to 131 cities between 2019 and 2025, but only about 68% of these funds were actually spent. A disproportionate 67% of allocated funds went to road dust management, while critical areas like industry, domestic fuel, and public outreach each received just 1% of funding. This skewed allocation highlights the lack of a holistic, multi-sector strategy.

Regulatory capture and conflicts of interest 🔗

The overrepresentation of industry and government corporation nominees on boards – accounting for over half of board members – creates a structural problem. When potential polluters have significant influence over the bodies meant to regulate them, the independence and credibility of enforcement decisions can be compromised.

Notable achievements despite the challenges 🔗

Expanding the monitoring network 🔗

One of the most tangible successes is the dramatic expansion of India’s air quality monitoring infrastructure. The NCAP originally targeted 150 CAAQMS stations, but over 530 were operational by 2024, far exceeding the initial goal. This has significantly improved the country’s ability to track pollution levels in real time and respond to air quality emergencies.

Progress under the National Clean Air Programme 🔗

Despite its limitations, NCAP has delivered measurable results. According to government data from 2024, 95 out of 131 target cities showed improvement in annual PM₁₀ concentrations compared to the 2017-18 baseline. Of these, 51 cities achieved reductions exceeding 20%, and 21 cities crossed the 40% reduction mark. While many cities still exceed national air quality standards, the overall trend is positive.

Cleaning the Ganga 🔗

The Namami Gange programme, which relies on CPCB monitoring data, has achieved notable milestones. Water quality improvements have been recorded at multiple points along the Ganga, and there has been a measurable recovery in biodiversity, including increased populations of Gangetic dolphins, otters, and turtles.

Industrial pollution management 🔗

Pollution control boards have facilitated the establishment of Common Effluent Treatment Plants (CETPs) in industrial clusters, making pollution control more accessible and affordable for small and medium enterprises. Textile clusters in Tamil Nadu and chemical clusters in Gujarat are often cited as success stories of this collaborative approach.

The road ahead 🔗

Strengthening India’s pollution control boards will require action on multiple fronts. Filling vacant positions with qualified technical staff, ensuring stable leadership tenures, increasing the representation of scientists and public health experts on boards, and improving fund utilisation are all essential steps. The adoption of technology-driven solutions like real-time monitoring, digital consent management, and airshed-based regional planning offers promising pathways forward.

The CPCB and SPCBs have built a strong regulatory foundation over five decades. The question now is whether India can give these institutions the resources and reforms they need to match the scale of the pollution challenge.

What do you think? Can India’s pollution control boards become truly effective by simply filling vacancies and increasing budgets, or do they need a more fundamental structural overhaul? How can the balance between economic development and environmental enforcement be better managed at the state level?

References

1. https://cpcb.nic.in/
2. https://elixirenviro.in/history-of-pollution-control-boards-india/
3. https://cprindia.org/workingpapers/the-state-of-indias-pollution-control-boards/
4. https://www.barandbench.com/columns/understaffed-and-overburdened-the-state-of-pollution-control-boards
5. https://energyandcleanair.org/publication/tracing-the-hazy-air-2025-progress-report-on-national-clean-air-programme-ncap/
6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Pollution_Control_Board
7. https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=1909910&reg=3&lang=2
8. https://india.mongabay.com/2022/11/staff-crunch-ailing-state-pollution-control-boards-in-india-finds-think-tank-analysis/
9. https://www.pib.gov.in/PressNoteDetails.aspx?NoteId=153186&ModuleId=3&reg=3&lang=1