Assertion : A brief expoosure to extremely high sound level, 150dB or more generated by take off of a jet plane or rocket, may damage ear drum or dislocate ear ossicles and permanently impair the hearing ability.
Reason : In India, the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution ) Act came into force in 1981, but was amended in 1987 to include noise as an air pollutant.

Answer

To analyze the given assertion and reason, we can break it down into a step-by-step solution:

### Step 1: Understanding the Assertion
The assertion states that exposure to extremely high sound levels (150 dB or more) can cause significant damage to the ear, including potential eardrum rupture and dislocation of ear ossicles, which can lead to permanent hearing impairment.

**Hint:** Consider the effects of high decibel levels on human physiology, particularly the auditory system.

### Step 2: Evaluating the Assertion
The assertion is true. Research shows that sound levels above 120 dB can cause immediate harm to hearing. Levels around 150 dB, such as those produced by jet planes or rockets during takeoff, are indeed capable of causing severe auditory damage.

**Hint:** Think about the threshold of pain for sound and its implications for hearing health.

### Step 3: Understanding the Reason
The reason provided states that the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act in India was enacted in 1981 and amended in 1987 to include noise as an air pollutant.

**Hint:** Reflect on the legal frameworks established to address environmental issues, including noise pollution.

### Step 4: Evaluating the Reason
The reason is also true. The inclusion of noise as an air pollutant in the legislation signifies recognition of its harmful effects on health and the environment.

**Hint:** Consider how laws evolve to address emerging environmental concerns.

### Step 5: Analyzing the Relationship Between Assertion and Reason
While both statements are true, the reason does not directly explain the assertion. The assertion discusses the physiological effects of high sound levels, while the reason pertains to legislative action regarding noise pollution.

**Hint:** Think about whether the reason provides a causal link to the assertion or merely states a fact.

### Conclusion
Both the assertion and reason are true, but the reason does not correctly explain the assertion. Therefore, the final answer is that both statements are correct, but the reason is not the correct explanation for the assertion.

---