NGT and CPCB: Founding Acts and Powers

A recurring trap on this chapter is dating the Central Pollution Control Board to the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, because that is the Act most students meet first and CPCB feels like "the" environment regulator. It is not. CPCB was constituted in September 1974, twelve years before EPA 1986 existed, under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. A second, sharper trap sits inside the National Green Tribunal's own jurisdiction: the NGT Act lists exactly seven enactments it can hear cases under, and the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, despite being the most obviously "environmental" law of the lot, is not one of them.

The sibling note Environment (Protection) Act 1986: EIA and CRZ covers EPA 1986 itself, in depth, including how the EIA Notification and CRZ Notification are issued under its Section 3 rule-making power. This note does not repeat that. It covers the two institutions built to enforce and adjudicate environmental law, the National Green Tribunal and the Central Pollution Control Board, and one piece of terminology, greenwashing, that has become a live regulatory term in India since 2024.

The National Green Tribunal

The National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 (Act No. 19 of 2010) states its own purpose in its long title: to provide for the establishment of a National Green Tribunal "for the effective and expeditious disposal of cases relating to environmental protection and conservation of forests and other natural resources including enforcement of any legal right relating to environment and giving relief and compensation for damages to persons and property." The Bill was passed by the Lok Sabha on 30 April 2010 and by the Rajya Sabha on 5 May 2010; it received the President's assent and came into force on the same day, 18 October 2010, via notification S.O. 2569(E). The Tribunal itself is headquartered in New Delhi, with additional sitting locations known as zonal benches (currently at Bhopal, Pune, Kolkata and Chennai) and territorial jurisdiction over each notified elsewhere.

Composition (Section 4): the Tribunal consists of one full-time Chairperson, along with a full-time Judicial Members' bench of not less than ten and up to a maximum of twenty members, and a full-time Expert Members' bench of the same range, ten to twenty, with the exact number in each category notified by the Central Government from time to time. When an application or appeal is actually heard, the number of Expert Members sitting must equal the number of Judicial Members, so a bench is never purely legal or purely technical.

Jurisdiction (Section 14): the NGT has jurisdiction over "all civil cases where a substantial question relating to environment (including enforcement of any legal right relating to environment) is involved," provided that question arises out of the implementation of an enactment listed in Schedule I. That Schedule lists exactly seven laws: the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974; the Water (Cess) Act, 1977; the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980; the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981; the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986; the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991; and the Biological Diversity Act, 2002. An application must ordinarily be filed within six months of the date the cause of action first arose, extendable by a further sixty days on sufficient cause. Two conspicuously environmental laws are missing from that list and, by design, sit outside the NGT's jurisdiction: the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, and the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (the Indian Forest Act, 1927 is also not on the list). This is a genuinely tested gap, not an oversight to gloss over: a dispute that turns purely on the Wildlife Protection Act cannot be brought before the NGT on that basis alone.

Relief and appeals (Sections 15, 16, 22): Section 15 lets the Tribunal award relief and compensation to victims of pollution and environmental damage (including accidents involving hazardous substances), order restitution of damaged property, and order restitution of the damaged environment for such area or areas as it thinks fit. Section 16 gives the NGT appellate jurisdiction over orders and decisions passed by authorities under the Schedule I enactments; an aggrieved person must appeal within thirty days of the order being communicated, extendable by a further sixty days on sufficient cause, a combined maximum window of ninety days. A further appeal from the Tribunal itself goes straight to the Supreme Court, not the High Court, within ninety days under Section 22, on grounds specified in Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (a question of law). This route bypassing the High Court is a distinctive, frequently tested structural feature.

Procedure and principles (Sections 19, 20, 29): Section 19 frees the NGT from the procedural rigidity of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, while binding it to the principles of natural justice, and it is expected to dispose of an application or appeal finally within six months of filing. Section 20 requires the Tribunal, while passing any order, decision or award, to apply three specific principles: sustainable development, the precautionary principle, and the polluter pays principle. Section 29 then bars civil courts from entertaining any matter the Tribunal is empowered to determine, whether in its original or appellate jurisdiction, and from granting an injunction in respect of any action taken, or to be taken, by or before the Tribunal in such a matter.

The Central Pollution Control Board

The single most exam-tested fact about CPCB is which Act created it, and the answer is not the one most students reach for. CPCB is a statutory body constituted in September 1974 under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, not under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. EPA 1986 came twelve years later, and CPCB was already an established institution by then.

Composition (Section 3, Water Act): the Central Board consists of a full-time Chairman, nominated by the Central Government, who must have special knowledge or practical experience in matters relating to environmental protection; up to five officials nominated by the Central Government to represent it; up to five persons nominated by the Central Government from among the members of the State Boards; up to three non-officials representing the interests of agriculture, fishery, industry or trade; two persons to represent companies or corporations owned, controlled or managed by the Central Government; and a full-time Member-Secretary possessing qualifications, knowledge and experience in the scientific, engineering or management aspects of pollution control.

Functions, added in layers across three Acts: under the Water Act 1974 itself (Section 16), CPCB's founding brief was to promote the cleanliness of streams and wells by preventing, controlling and abating water pollution: advising the Central Government on water pollution matters, coordinating the activities of State Boards, providing technical assistance and guidance, sponsoring investigations and research, planning and organising training for pollution-control personnel, organising mass public-education programmes, and collecting and publishing water-quality data and laying down standards for streams and wells. In 1981, CPCB was additionally entrusted with the corresponding powers and functions under the newly enacted Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981, extending its brief from water to air quality. Under EPA 1986, CPCB serves as a field formation and technical arm for the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, exercising powers the Ministry delegates to it under that Act. The result is an institution whose founding statute is the Water Act 1974, whose remit was doubled by the Air Act 1981, and whose role was extended a third time, administratively, under EPA 1986, a sequence questions like to scramble by naming only the most recent Act.

Environmental terminology: greenwashing

Greenwashing is the practice of making a product, policy or organisation appear more environmentally friendly than it actually is, through false, exaggerated or unsubstantiated environmental claims. The word is a blend of "green" and "whitewashing," and it was coined in 1986 by the environmentalist Jay Westerveld, in an essay describing a hotel in Fiji that asked guests to reuse their towels "to save the environment," a request that conveniently also saved the hotel on laundry costs while the hotel's own broader environmental practices went unexamined.

The term has moved from a media critique into live Indian consumer- protection law. On 15 October 2024, the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA), the regulator constituted under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, issued the Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Greenwashing or Misleading Environmental Claims, 2024. These guidelines apply to manufacturers, service providers, advertisers, advertising agencies and endorsers who make environmental claims about a product, service or business practice. Their core requirement is that every environmental claim be clear, specific and unambiguous, and be backed by verifiable evidence, whether reliable scientific or technical data or credible third-party certification; a claim cannot cherry-pick favourable findings while omitting unfavourable ones, and commonly used terms such as "green," "eco-friendly" or "carbon neutral" cannot be used without adequate qualification. Because the CCPA operates under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, a company found guilty of a false or misleading advertisement under that Act's general provisions faces imprisonment of up to two years and a fine of up to ten lakh rupees for a first offence, rising to up to five years and up to fifty lakh rupees for a subsequent offence.

Why this is tested

This chapter rewards precision about which authority did what, and when, rather than a general sense that "environmental institutions exist." Examiners test whether a statement quietly swaps CPCB's real founding Act (the Water Act 1974) for the more familiar EPA 1986, and whether it correctly separates CPCB's three layers of authority: born under the Water Act, extended to air pollution under the Air Act 1981, and given a further administrative role under EPA 1986. On the NGT, the trap usually runs the other way: a statement claims the Tribunal has jurisdiction over "all" environmental matters, when in fact its jurisdiction is tied to a closed list of seven Acts in Schedule I, one that pointedly excludes the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. A second NGT trap tests the appeal route: a decision of the Tribunal is appealed directly to the Supreme Court, not routed through a High Court first. On greenwashing, the exam-relevant edge is no longer just the dictionary definition, it is that India now has a named 2024 regulatory instrument, the CCPA's Guidelines, addressing it directly, which places this squarely in current-affairs-meets-terminology territory rather than pure static environment.

Quick revision points

• NGT Act, 2010 (Act No. 19 of 2010): passed by Parliament in April/May 2010, assented to and came into force on 18 October 2010. Purpose stated in its own long title: "effective and expeditious disposal" of environment-related cases.
• Composition: 1 full-time Chairperson, 10 to 20 full-time Judicial Members, 10 to 20 full-time Expert Members (Section 4); a hearing bench has equal numbers of Judicial and Expert Members.
• Jurisdiction (Section 14): only over "substantial questions relating to environment" arising under the seven Schedule I Acts (Water Act 1974, Water Cess Act 1977, Forest Conservation Act 1980, Air Act 1981, EPA 1986, Public Liability Insurance Act 1991, Biological Diversity Act 2002). The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and the Forest Rights Act, 2006 are notably excluded.
• Appeals: to the NGT within 30 days (+60 days) of an order under a Schedule I Act (Section 16); from the NGT to the Supreme Court within 90 days (Section 22), bypassing the High Court.
• Section 19: not bound by the CPC, guided by natural justice, 6-month disposal target. Section 20: must apply sustainable development, the precautionary principle and the polluter pays principle. Section 29: bars civil courts from matters the NGT can determine.
• CPCB was constituted in September 1974 under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, not EPA 1986. Composition (Section 3): full-time Chairman, up to 5 Central Government officials, up to 5 State Board nominees, up to 3 non-officials (agriculture/fishery/industry/trade), 2 government-company representatives, and a full-time Member-Secretary.
• CPCB's functions expanded in layers: water pollution (Water Act 1974) to air pollution (Air Act 1981) to a technical/field role for the Ministry under EPA 1986.
• Greenwashing: coined 1986 by Jay Westerveld (the Fiji hotel towel-reuse essay); false or unsubstantiated claims of environmental benefit. India's CCPA Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Greenwashing or Misleading Environmental Claims, 2024 (15 October 2024) require verifiable, non-cherry-picked substantiation for every environmental claim.

Keep the two founding dates and the two exclusion lists straight: CPCB predates EPA 1986 by twelve years, and the NGT's Schedule I is a closed list of seven Acts that leaves wildlife law outside its door.