In this country, the pollution is controlled through two main legislations The Water Act 1974 and Air Act 1981. The Central Pollution Control Board and the various State Pollution Control Boards are at the crux of making these laws work and these-governments possess a pretty extensive regulation, oversight and even quasi-judicial powers. Five and a half decades since the enactment of such laws, the scope of the activities these Boards can undertake is vast both because Parliament has changed a few of the laws and because the National Green Tribunal, and the Supreme Court, continuously expanded the rights such Boards have. This paper examines the details of Section 33A of the Water Act and Section 31A of the Air Act the provisions which enable the Pollution Control Boards to issue directions for closure of factory premises, step down of electricity and water supply, and even to demand payment of environmental damages and how the powers have continued to expand. It also thoroughly reviews the extent to which the administrative discretion exercised by these Boards remains within constitutional constraints such as the rule of law, prohibition of arbitrary action, natural justice and proportionality. This paper argues: yes, increasing the power of Boards would be helpful to make environmental governance actually function; but increase in the power should be accompanied by robust procedural structure, transparency and judicial controls to ensure it is not misused, by referring to the recent case law in the area of environmental damages at the PPP (Polluter Pays Principle).