SC relief for Maharashtra, Uttarakhand

SC relief for Maharashtra, Uttarakhand

News

1. Supreme Court has lifted the ban on construction activities in Maharashtra and Uttarakhand, after they submitted their Solid Waste Management (SWM) policy.

Important facts:

2. Background:

• More than two-third of the States/UTs had neither complied with the orders of the Court nor with the directions of Environment Ministry.
• Taking the suo-moto cognizance of the waste management system across, the SC had ordered a ban on the construction activities of some states/UTs.
• It also imposed fines on defaulting states including Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh etc.

3. Issues associated with poor solid waste management (SWM):

• Poor solid waste management is responsible for the spread of diseases and pollution.
• The number of annual deaths on the account of air pollution and air-borne diseases is on the rise.

4. Impact of the judgement:

• The ban on construction will curtail the increasing concretisation of cities and the pollution it causes.
• The ban will compel the states to quickly frame SWM policy.
• It will negatively affect the construction industry.
• It is estimated that the housing projects amounting to about 11 lakh Cr will be affected.
• It will result into job losses, expectedly it will impact 7.65 labourers across the states on the daily basis.
• Delayed possessions to homes put buyers in trouble.

5. Present situation:

• SC has lifted the ban on Maharashtra and Uttarakhand, as they have submitted the SWM policy before the court.
• The Chandigarh administration has notified the SWM policy and will soon furnish it before the court.
• Other states are also rushing into frame solid waste management rules.
• All the states have framed their action plan and have submitted to the Environment Ministry.

6. Problems with solid waste management:

• Only 75-80 % of the municipal waste gets collected and out of this only 22-28 % is processed.
• Lack of social awareness resulting into very low rate of segregation at source.
• Lack of political will, most states don’t have any SWM policy and even if they have there are no bye-laws and no implementation.
• Informal workforce for waste collection reduce accountability.
• Inefficiencies in municipal bodies mainly due to paucity of funds and expertise.

7. Way forward:

• Central government must check the implementation of SWM rules 2016, by the state-level advisory bodies.
• RERA must direct the builders to create facility for residents to segregate waste at source.
• Civil societies must be included in task to create awareness regarding waste management in the society.
• Municipal authorities must be enabled financially and technically to implement SWM Rules.
• The cess collected under the Building and Other Construction Workers Act, 1996 can be utilised to bring in efficiency in the SWM system.