On Tuesday,(9th July), The Supreme Court of India, under Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan, raised concerns over municipal bodies charging user fees for sanitary waste collection alongside solid waste. They stressed the importance of segregating waste types, suggesting that fees should apply only to solid waste, not sanitary waste.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: On Tuesday,(9th July), The Supreme Court of India expressed significant concerns regarding the practice of charging user fees by municipal bodies across various states and union territories for the collection of sanitary waste. This concern was raised during a session presided over by Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan, where the issue of waste segregation and fee imposition was discussed in detail.
The Bench emphasized the necessity of segregating solid waste from sanitary waste. They opined that while it is reasonable to charge a fee for solid waste collection, sanitary waste collection should not incur any fees.
Justice Surya Kant remarked-
“How can low and middle-income families afford these charges? We need a practical approach.”
The State of Kerala defended its stance by referring to Rule 3(15) of the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016, which permits the collection of such fees. However, Justice Kant was not convinced and stressed the importance of a practical and inclusive approach.
He stated-
“We will need the assistance of Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Bhati. Sanitary waste can be segregated from other types of waste and should not incur any charges. For solid waste, you may proceed with the current charges. However, regarding sanitary pads (as sanitary waste), we intend to issue a comprehensive order.”
The petitioner-in-person argued that according to the 2016 Rules, ‘sanitary waste’ falls under the category of solid waste. Despite this, the Court expressed its inability to issue a blanket order without adequate information. Therefore, the Bench directed the petitioner to prepare a detailed chart illustrating how the fee imposition for sanitary waste should be managed.
ALSO READ:Supreme Court Criticizes Centre for Failing to Implement Disability Act & Fill Backlog Vacancies
The Supreme Court addressed the pressing issues raised in a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Indu Varma. The petitioner challenged the Kochi Municipal Corporation‘s approach to sanitary waste management, which allegedly forces residents to engage third-party services and pay per-weight user fees for waste disposal.
Justice Kant emphasized the need for a nuanced approach to the matter, stating-
“We request you to create a small chart outlining the categories where charges can be fully levied, partially levied, and where no charges should be imposed. Please identify the categories to be exempted, considering school-going children, young people, the elderly, the poor and marginalized, and those living in huts. Our focus is specifically on sanitary waste.”
The Court was hearing the plea from Indu Varma, which primarily focused on the non-collection of sanitary waste from households in Kochi. The plea highlighted the plight of residents who are compelled to approach third-party services due to the Kochi Municipal Corporation’s policies.
Recognizing the broader implications of the issue, the Court had earlier expanded the scope of the petition to include other states and Union Territories (UTs). On May 7, the Court directed these entities to file their counter-affidavits, considering the matter to be of pan-India significance.
During the recent hearing, it was revealed that only five out of fifteen states and UTs had submitted their counter-affidavits. This prompted the Court to seek the stance of the Central government on the issue.
In response, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aishwarya Bhati stated-
“The Union has taken a policy stance on this issue as per the Constitution. We have also referenced relevant articles of the Constitution in our affidavit. Since this matter falls under the State List, all states are currently addressing it.”
The Court acknowledged the constitutional framework presented by the ASG and directed the remaining states and UTs to submit their counter-affidavits by the next hearing scheduled for August. The directive underscores the urgency and importance of resolving the sanitary waste disposal issues affecting numerous residents across various states and UTs.
The petitioner, Indu Varma, argued that the current policies of the Kochi Municipal Corporation place an undue financial burden on residents, compelling them to seek costly third-party waste disposal services. The plea calls for a more equitable and efficient system for managing sanitary waste, particularly for vulnerable groups such as school-going children, young people, the elderly, the poor, and marginalized communities living in inadequate housing conditions.
Justice Kant’s remarks highlight the need for a balanced approach in levying charges for sanitary waste disposal. The Court’s directive to create a detailed chart identifying categories where charges can and cannot be imposed reflects a commitment to ensuring fairness and accessibility in public health measures.
As the case progresses, the focus will remain on addressing the constitutional and practical aspects of sanitary waste management. The involvement of multiple states and UTs indicates the widespread relevance of the issue, with potential implications for policy reforms across the country.
The Supreme Court’s intervention in this matter underscores the critical importance of effective waste management systems that do not disproportionately impact vulnerable populations. By seeking comprehensive input from various states and UTs, the Court aims to establish a more inclusive and sustainable framework for sanitary waste disposal.
The next hearing in August will be pivotal in determining the future course of action and potential policy changes to address the concerns raised in the PIL. The Court’s directives and the responses from the states and UTs will be closely watched by stakeholders and residents alike, as they seek a resolution to the sanitary waste disposal challenges.
Chart for Sanitary Waste Disposal Charges
| Category | Charges to be Levied | Partial Charges | No Charges |
|---|---|---|---|
| School-going children | ✔️ | ||
| Young people | ✔️ | ||
| Elderly | ✔️ | ||
| Poor and marginalized | ✔️ | ||
| People living in huts | ✔️ | ||
| General population | ✔️ | ||
| High-income residents | ✔️ |
This chart categorizes different groups and their respective charges for sanitary waste disposal, considering exemptions for vulnerable populations as highlighted by Justice Kant.
