A Right to Information (RTI) query has revealed a striking disconnect between environmental fine collections and their actual utilisation by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB). Despite collecting ₹45.81 crore as environmental compensation (EC) from 2018 to 2024, the agency spent a mere ₹9 lakh, accounting for less than 0.2% of the total funds.
This information, disclosed in response to an RTI filed by activist Amit Gupta, highlights a persistent trend: environmental penalties are being amassed but rarely channelled into environmental protection efforts. Shockingly, the CPCB failed to spend a single rupee from the EC corpus in most of the years during this period—except in 2024–25, when just ₹9 lakh was finally disbursed.
These compensation funds—collected directly by the CPCB and via state pollution boards—are legally mandated to support pollution control initiatives such as enhancing lab infrastructure, strengthening air quality monitoring, and funding environmental compliance studies. However, the data points to a near-total absence of execution.
Meanwhile, the Board’s handling of the Environment Protection Charge (EPC)—meant specifically for combating air pollution in Delhi-NCR—reflects similar inefficiency. From 2014–15 to 2024–25, CPCB collected around ₹427.37 crore under EPC but utilised just ₹130.9 crore, barely 30% of the amount.
The EPC, introduced on the Supreme Court’s directive, is imposed on large diesel vehicles (engine size 2,000 cc and above) sold in the National Capital Region. Its purpose: to back critical anti-pollution efforts including research, health impact assessments, and pollution mitigation technologies.
Even in 2024–25—the year with the highest collection of ₹74.39 crore—just ₹31.98 crore was spent. Previous years echo the same pattern: for instance, in 2016–17, only ₹0.01 crore was used out of ₹29.28 crore collected; in 2023–24, ₹65.28 crore was collected, but spending remained limited to ₹22.38 crore.
While CPCB asserts that over ₹259 crore has been committed to 15 projects across Delhi-NCR—including mechanical road sweepers, anti-smog guns, and cleaner fuel transitions in government hospitals—execution on the ground has lagged far behind.
Cities like Noida, Ghaziabad, and Faridabad have been allocated resources for pollution-control equipment. Delhi itself has received a smog tower, and funds have been promised for retrofitting diesel generators in critical institutions. Yet much of this remains in planning or initial phases, with actual disbursement failing to keep pace.
Equally concerning is the spending pattern of EC funds. While CPCB claims to have cleared 67 projects under EC, few appear to have been implemented meaningfully. These include limited studies—such as testing toxic residue in cigarettes, sampling water and soil near the Yamuna, and a small compensation payout to students through the Delhi Legal Services Authority.
Gupta criticised this chronic inaction as more than administrative delay. “This is not just sluggish execution; it’s institutional apathy,” he said. “When crores are collected in the name of environmental damage but never reach the ground, the pollution crisis only deepens.”
Earlier this year, a parliamentary committee expressed alarm over similar patterns within the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. Out of ₹858 crore allocated for the ministry’s "Control of Pollution" scheme in FY 2024–25, only ₹7.22 crore had been used by January.
Some of the more ambitious ideas—such as setting up paddy straw pelletisation units to address stubble burning in Punjab and NCR—remain underfunded or delayed. Several smaller cities not included in the National Clean Air Programme (NCAP) were promised EPC-backed aid, but the outcomes remain unclear.