'Sorry State Of Solid Waste Management In Capital' : Supreme Court Asks Union To Convene Urgent Meeting With GNCTD, MCD

Deploring the sorry state of affairs in the national capital regarding the treatment of solid waste, the Supreme Court on Friday (July 26) directed the Secretary of the Union Ministry of Environment to convene an immediate meeting with officials of the Delhi government, the Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi(MCD) and other MCD officers to devise an urgent solution to this crisis.

A bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice AG Masih raised alarm about a potential public health emergency, noting that 11000 metric tonnes of solid waste is generated per day in the capital city but the processing capacity stands at only 8,073 metric tons per day, leaving a substantial amount of waste untreated.

The affidavit filed by the MCD indicated that the capacity to process 11000 metric tons of solid waste daily can be augmented only by 2027. The bench recorded the gravity of the situation in its order as follows :

“In the affidavit filed by MCD, they have come out with the timelines and pointed out pending litigation. We don't see light by the end of the tunnel as going by the affidavit and assuming that timelines are abided by, there is no possibility of creating facilities in Delhi even till 2027 which will have the capacity to deal with 11000 metric tons of solid waste every day. No guesswork is required to state that by that time the generation of solid waste will multiply. We agree with Learned Amicus (Senior Advocate Aparajita Singh) that this will lead to a public health emergency. This is a sorry state of affairs when it comes to implementation of Solid Waste Management Rules in the capital city."

In its order, the Court observed that the situation of waste management capacities in Gurugram, Faridabad, and Greater Noida is “equally worst”. Gurugram generates 1,200 metric tons of waste per day but can process only 254 metric tons, while Faridabad produces 1,000 metric tons but processes only 410 metric tons, the court noted, observing that the situation in Greater Noida is slightly better but still insufficient.

The Court directed the Union Ministry of Environment to convene a meeting with Municipal Commissioners of Gurugram and Faridabad and officers of Greater Noida Development Authority and state government environment department officers to devise immediate solutions.

The Secretary of the Union Ministry of Environment is directed to submit reports for Delhi and these three cities within one month.

Unable to convene standing committee meetings due to 'impasse' : MCD

Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy for the MCD highlighted that the standing committee of MCD is not being convened because there is an impasse in the state. She sought permission to MCD to approve rate and agency contracts beyond Rs. 5 Crores till the impasse is resolved.

Justice Oka said, "In a lighter vein, not only people but genuine issues affecting the capital city are in the crossfire between the two. This is one example.”

The Court noted that the MCD had requested the delegation of financial powers to approve rate and agency contracts beyond Rs. 5 Crores as per Section 202 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act for solid waste management projects.

The Supreme Court directed the Government of NCT to make an appropriate decision on this within three weeks. “Considering the prevailing situation if this permission is not granted to MCD, it will not be in a position to comply with 2016 Rules”, the Court said in its order.

The Court also directed the Government of India to submit a report outlining immediate measures to ensure that non-compliance with the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 does not create a serious health emergency in Delhi.

Lack of implementation of Solid Waste Management Rules in NCR

Justice Oka expressed concern over the lack of implementation of the 2016 Rules in Delhi and other NCR cities.

During the proceedings, Guruswamy asserted that MCD had complied with the Rules and planned for a capacity of 15000 metric tonnes. Justice Oka said that merely planning for future capacity was insufficient when thousands of metric tons of waste remained untreated daily.

Guruswamy explained that the expansion of waste processing facilities has been delayed by litigation and public opposition. She stated that four expansion plans are currently stuck in litigation and that a facility expansion planned for Okhla, which would increase capacity from 1,950 metric tons to 2,950 metric tons, is set to be operational by March 2026, with environmental clearance granted. “We would have expanded the facility years ago. We have worked hard to comply with the orders”, she said.

However, the court did not accept this, responding, “You are not obliging anybody by complying. The Rules are of 2016. Don't be under any impression that you are obliging anybody.”

Guruswamy submitted that the Supreme Court has allowed the expansion work of a facility but subjected it to the final outcome of the litigation against it. Pointing out that there is no prohibition imposed by the Court on the litigation policy, Justice Abhay S Oka said :

“Ordinary litigant will bother about such orders not a public authority which is invested with the constitutional duty to protect the environment. This argument can come only from private party or some contractor not the Municipal Authority. If this is the approach that though court permits, we will not carry out the work, we will summon the Commissioner. We don't like this approach like a private litigant”

Justice Abhay Oka pointed out that there is no legal prohibition against proceeding with expansion plans. Guruswamy responded that MCD cannot ask private contractors to invest substantial amounts in the face of ongoing litigation.

“Ultimately you intention has to be positive. Intention should be to finding a way out. If you keep on thinking about difficulties, it is an endless process. Court permitted you to go ahead, you go ahead”, Justice Oka remarked.

Justice Oka suggested appointing a different contractor to advance the work, if the contractor does not want to commence work due to litigation.

“We will summon the Commissioner. If your corporation's Commissioner has no control over the contractor, then he is helpless. We are worried about this. In the capital city this is the state of affairs. And solid waste will increase”, Justice Oka said.

Justice Oka inquired whether MCD had looked for alternative sites if the proposed site were under litigation.

Guruswamy explained that moving an existing waste processing plant is not feasible as it was strategically located near dumps for efficient transportation.

Case no. – Writ Petition (Civil) No. 13029/1985

Case Title – MC Mehta v. Union of India & Ors.