Himachal Pradesh High Court’s Landmark Order: A Beacon for Waste management Stewardship

~ lawumbrella


Shimla, Himachal Pradesh – In a landmark decision that underscores the judiciary’s commitment to environmental sustainability, the High Court of Himachal Pradesh through Hon’ble Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, has issued a comprehensive order, setting a new precedent for waste management and environmental protection in the state. The order, stemming from the case “Suleman vs. Union of India,” encompasses a wide array of directives aimed at enhancing waste management practices, promoting sustainable environmental policies, and ensuring strict compliance with environmental laws.(check earlier directions here https://lawumbrella.org/2023/11/26/high-court-of-himachal-pradesh-orders-stringent-implementation-of-solid-waste-management-laws/)

The Plastic Producer’s Liability

In its comprehensive order, the High Court has provided a clear and directive understanding of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR). EPR is a policy approach under which producers are given a significant responsibility – financial and/or physical – for the treatment or disposal of post-consumer products. Assigning such responsibility could in principle provide incentives to prevent waste at the source, promote product design for the environment, and support the achievement of public recycling and materials management goals.

“The registered Producers, Importers/Brand Owners (‘PIBOs’) and Waste Management Agencies (‘WMAs’) are directed to explore the registered Plastic Waste Processors (‘PWPs’) in the State of Himachal Pradesh…”

The court’s directives regarding EPR (Extended producer’s responsibility ) are multifaceted and aim at ensuring a robust framework for waste management, particularly plastic waste, within Himachal Pradesh. Here’s a summary of the court’s understanding and directives on EPR:

  • Mandatory EPR Registration: The court directed all entities that have not yet applied for EPR registration to do so within one month. This directive aims to bring all producers, importers, and brand owners under the purview of regulatory oversight, ensuring they contribute to the management of waste generated from their products.
  • Local Processing of Plastic Waste: To facilitate the effective management of plastic waste, the court emphasized the importance of exploring registered Plastic Waste Processors within the state. This approach is intended to minimize the logistical costs and environmental impact associated with transporting waste out of state and to encourage the local processing of waste.
  • Quarterly Reporting: The court mandated recyclers to submit details of the quantity of plastic waste processed to the Himachal Pradesh State Pollution Control Board (HPSPCB) on a quarterly basis. This measure is aimed at monitoring and ensuring compliance with EPR obligations, providing a transparent mechanism for accountability.
  • Collaboration with Local Bodies: Producers, importers, and brand owners are directed to collaborate with Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) and Gram Panchayats for the collection, segregation, and processing of plastic waste. This collaborative approach is aimed at enhancing the efficiency of waste management systems and ensuring that EPR schemes are effectively implemented at the local level.
  • EPR Fulfillment and Reporting: The court stressed the necessity for all PIBOs (Producers, Importers, Brand Owners) to submit details of the plastic waste generated from their products in the state and to fulfill their EPR obligations through collaboration with registered waste processors and local bodies. The court also mandated that all EPR compliance progress should be reported through the Central Pollution Control Board’s (CPCB) online portal, moving away from offline modes to ensure transparency and ease of monitoring.

The court’s directives on EPR reflect a comprehensive understanding of the principle’s role in waste management. By emphasizing local processing, mandatory registration, regular reporting, and collaboration with local bodies, the court aims to create a sustainable ecosystem for waste management that not only addresses environmental concerns but also incentivizes producers to engage in more environmentally friendly practices. This approach aligns with the broader objectives of reducing the environmental footprint of products and ensuring that producers take responsibility for the entire lifecycle of their products, particularly in terms of waste management and recycling.

The Non-Negotiables of Human Rights and Environmental Justice

Perhaps the most striking of the quotes is the court’s reflection on the non-negotiable aspects of human rights in the context of environmental governance:


“Decency and dignity are non-negotiable facets of human rights and are a first charge on local self-governing bodies.”

This quote elevates the conversation from the specifics of waste management to the universal principles of dignity and decency. By asserting that decency and dignity are “non-negotiable,” the court reinforces the idea that environmental governance is inherently tied to the respect and preservation of human rights. It acknowledges that effective environmental management—be it through waste disposal, pollution control, or sustainable development practices—must be conducted with a view towards protecting and enhancing the dignity of all individuals.

The Enforcement of Environmental Laws

The court’s assertion that


“The law will relentlessly be enforced, and the plea of poor finance will be poor alibi when people in misery cry for justice,”

is a powerful reminder of the judiciary’s role in ensuring that environmental laws are more than mere suggestions. It is a declaration of the court’s intent to hold parties accountable and a reminder of the urgency and seriousness with which environmental issues must be addressed.

Levy of charge on tourists entering the State

The Court reasoned that levy of such charges (as is also mentioned in SWM Rules of 2016) on tourists entering the hilly State was essential to make the solid waste management services sustainable. In this regard, a division bench suggested that the State take Bhutan’s example, where tourists are asked to pay a Sustainable Development Fee (SDF).

“We would impress upon the State Government to empower the Local Bodies to levy solid waste management charges upon tourists at the entry point to make the solid waste management services sustainable. The Government could take a cue from Bhutan where in September, 2022, it imposed a sustainable development fee of dollars 200 per day per visitor However, fee was cut by half from September 2023 and fixed at dollar 100 per day per tourist and and in the case of children age 6 to 12 years, they were required to pay dollar 50 per child and there was no fee for children age 5 or under,” the Court noted.

The key directions issued by the High Court with respect to the Municipal Corporation Shimla

These directions are intended to transform Shimla into a model town for SWM practices, which can then be emulated by other Urban Local Bodies (ULBs). Here are the key directives:

  1. Legislative Framework Amendment: The court observed that the Himachal Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act and its rules and bylaws, enacted in 1994, have not been updated to align with the Solid Waste Management Rules of 2016 and other relevant environmental laws introduced thereafter. The Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh is directed to take immediate steps to amend these legislative provisions to empower municipal authorities to enforce modern environmental and SWM regulations effectively.
  2. Enforcement of SWM Rules 2016: Pending the amendment of the municipal laws, the court directs the strict enforcement of Rule-4 of the SWM Rules 2016. This rule lays out the responsibilities of waste generators, including segregation of waste into three categories (biodegradable, non-biodegradable, and hazardous), proper disposal of sanitary waste, management of construction and demolition waste, and compliance with directives for event waste management.
  3. Event Waste Management: The court addresses the issue of waste generation at events held outside of hotels, directing that organizers must inform local authorities in advance, ensure segregation at source, and facilitate the proper disposal of waste. The Municipal Corporation may require a refundable pre-deposit from organizers to ensure compliance, with penalties for non-compliance.
  4. Adequacy of Municipal Staff: The court expresses concern over the insufficient number of sanitary inspectors and the classification of Dafadars as a dying cadre within the Shimla Municipal Corporation. It questions how effective SWM practices can be implemented with such limited staffing and calls for a review and enhancement of the workforce to ensure the operational effectiveness of the Municipal Corporation in managing SWM.

These directives are aimed at addressing both the structural and operational challenges faced by the Municipal Corporation Shimla in managing solid waste. By updating the legislative framework, enforcing current SWM rules, ensuring proper waste management at events, improving training for municipal officials, and addressing staffing concerns, the court seeks to establish a robust and effective SWM system in Shimla.

Summary of the key directions given to the State Government and the Chief Secretary:

  • Immediate Land Availability for SWM Facilities: The court directed the State Government to take immediate steps to make land available for Solid Waste Management (SWM) facilities in various Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) where such land is not currently available.
  • Amendment of Municipal Laws: The Chief Secretary was directed to initiate steps for amending the Municipal Corporation Act, rules, regulations, and byelaws to incorporate the provisions of the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016, and other relevant environmental regulations that have been enacted after the original laws were framed.
  • Capacity Building and Training: The court directed the Himachal Pradesh Institute of Public Administration (HIPA) to conduct at least a week-long course for all councillors, to educate them about the municipal laws as well as various environmental laws and the importance of solid waste management.
  • Enhancement of Municipal Workforce: The court expressed concern over the inadequate number of sanitary inspectors and other municipal staff for waste management. The Chief Secretary was directed to convene a meeting with relevant officials to ensure that adequate manpower is provided to the Municipal Authorities for effective waste management.
  • Financial Sustainability of Waste Management: The court directed the State Government to ensure the financial sustainability of waste management operations. This includes rationalizing user charges to cover the costs of collection, transportation, and processing of waste.
  • Promotion of Sustainable Tourism: The court suggested that the State Government could levy a solid waste management charge on tourists at entry points to make solid waste management services sustainable, similar to practices in other regions like Bhutan.
  • Implementation of Environmental and Waste Management Laws: The Chief Secretary was directed to ensure the rigorous implementation of environmental and waste management laws across the state, including the directives issued by the court in its order.
  • Compliance and Action Reports: The court required the Chief Secretary, along with other relevant government officials, to file compliance affidavits and action taken reports, detailing the steps taken to implement the court’s directives.
  • Waste Audit: The State Government was encouraged to facilitate a waste audit to be conducted by the Integrated Mountain Initiative (IMI) Society, aiming to gather empirical data for informed decision-making in waste management policies and practices.

Consideration of a Ban: The court urged the Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh to consider implementing a ban on the use of plastic flex banners across the state.

  • Drawing Inspiration from Other Regions: The order references the measures taken by states like Kerala, Karnataka, Nagaland, and Maharashtra, as well as cities like Chennai, Bengaluru, and Pune, which have implemented bans or restrictions on the use of plastic flexi banners. The court suggests that Himachal Pradesh could benefit from adopting similar measures to address the issues of environmental degradation and visual pollution associated with these banners.
  • Evaluation of Environmental and Health Hazards: The court highlighted the environmental and health hazards posed by plastic flex banners, including their contribution to toxic pollution when burned, their non-biodegradable nature, and their potential to leach toxins into the soil and water bodies. The Chief Secretary was tasked with taking these hazards into account when considering the implementation of a ban.
  • Encouragement of Sustainable Alternatives: In addition to considering a ban on plastic flex banners, the court encouraged the exploration and adoption of more sustainable and environmentally friendly advertising alternatives. This includes the use of digital signage or materials that are biodegradable and less harmful to the environment.
  • Action from the Chief Secretary: The Chief Secretary was directed to take a call on the matter, considering the environmental impacts that have led other regions to ban or restrict the use of plastic flex banners. This includes evaluating the potential for visual pollution, safety concerns, resource consumption, and the overall aesthetic value of public spaces.

Summary of the court’s directives concerning the multi-members committee’s work for improving solid waste management:

  1. Manpower and Outsourcing: ULBs are directed to ensure adequate staffing for 100% waste segregation and collection, utilizing outsourced agencies if necessary.
  2. Penalties for Non-compliance: ULBs are tasked with enforcing strict penalties for failure to segregate waste at the source and for littering.
  3. Vehicle Compartmentalization: For safe waste transportation, ULBs must use compartmentalized vehicles, a requirement that also applies to outsourced agencies. Necessary funding should be sourced from tied grants or ULB resources.
  4. Waste Processing:
    • Wet Waste: ULBs should adopt mechanized composting using modern equipment for wet waste processing, with decentralized solutions suggested for areas with suitable temperatures.
    • Dry Waste: ULBs are encouraged to collaborate with cement plants for co-processing dry waste. Cement plants are directed to provide transportation under Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) obligations.
  5. EPR Registration and Support: ULBs yet to register on the CPCB’s centralized EPR portal are directed to do so and receive support from relevant authorities to facilitate funding from brand owners.
  6. SWM Site Management: Waste management sites across the state must be adequately maintained, roof-topped, fenced, and surrounded by plantation to prevent animal entry and enhance environmental quality.
  7. Financial Sustainability: The court suggests considering tied grants for SWM to assist ULBs and directs them to rationalize user charges to cover waste management costs adequately.
  8. Waste Processing Facilities: ULBs facing challenges with existing waste processing arrangements are directed to consider establishing their own facilities, ensuring compliance and efficiency in waste management.
  9. Management Autonomy for Certain ULBs: ULBs like Nalagarh and Parwanoo, with the capacity to manage waste independently, are directed to reevaluate existing agreements to manage waste at their own level.
  10. User Charges and Financial Viability: The court observed a significant gap between the cost of waste management services and the user charges collected. It directs ULBs to adjust user charges to at least match the collection and transportation costs, treating unpaid charges as arrears.
  11. Addressing Waste Dumping Hotspots: ULBs are instructed to form dedicated teams for eliminating waste dumping hotspots and preventing their recurrence, with penalties imposed on violators.
  12. Responsibility and Accountability: The entire elected body of ULBs, including Presidents and Vice Presidents, are held accountable for the effective implementation of environmental laws.
  13. Public Awareness: The court emphasizes the need for continuous Information, Education, and Communication (IEC) activities to raise environmental awareness, involving various stakeholders in these efforts.
  14. Land Availability for Waste Management: The court directs swift action in identifying and making land available for waste management facilities, with a specific call to action for addressing delays in land transfers for such purposes.
  15. Cluster-Based Landfill Development: Considering the scarcity of land for landfill sites, the court suggests developing landfill sites on a cluster basis to serve multiple ULBs, promoting shared responsibility and cost-efficiency in waste management.

Other Key highlights/ Summary of directions in the order;

• Mandate for Clean-up of Hotspots: The court ordered the identification and clean-up of waste dumping hotspots, especially in fringe areas, to prevent environmental degradation and promote public health.
• Modeling Shimla for Waste Management: The court aimed to make Shimla a benchmark for other Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) in managing solid waste. It suggests amendments to municipal laws to incorporate post-1994 environmental regulations, including the Solid Waste Management Rules of 2016, into the governance framework of municipal bodies.
• Encouragement of Alternatives to Plastic: The court encouraged the exploration and adoption of sustainable and environmentally friendly alternatives to plastic, aiming to reduce plastic pollution and its harmful effects on the environment.
• Strengthening of Municipal Capabilities: There was a call for enhancing the capabilities of municipal bodies through better training, increased manpower, and technological support, ensuring they are equipped to enforce waste management laws effectively.
• Incentivizing Public Participation: The order recognized the importance of incentivizing public participation in waste management processes, including the segregation of waste at the source and adherence to disposal guidelines.
• IEC (Information, Education, and Communication) Activities: The court stressed the importance of ongoing IEC activities to create awareness among the masses regarding waste management and environmental conservation.
• Collaboration with NGOs and Community Groups: The order encouraged collaboration with NGOs, community groups, and local stakeholders to foster a community-based approach to waste management and environmental protection.

Special Considerations for Hilly Areas;

Acknowledging the unique challenges of waste management in hilly regions, the court issued specific directives to avoid landfill construction on hills, promote decentralized waste processing, and encourage sustainable practices among tourists, including levying a solid waste management charge.

Implementation and Oversight
To ensure effective implementation, the court directed various government departments and officials to submit action reports and compliance affidavits. It also emphasized the need for financial sustainability in waste management operations, suggesting the rationalization of user charges to cover the costs of collection, transportation, and processing of waste.

Encouraging Sustainable Practices and Penalties for Non-Compliance
One of the hallmark directives of the court’s order is the emphasis on encouraging sustainable waste management practices and imposing penalties for non-compliance. The court recognized the pivotal role of municipalities in enforcing solid waste management rules and suggested that financial constraints should not hinder environmental conservation efforts. The judgment underscores the principle that environmental protection and public health are paramount, and that municipal bodies must ensure the rigorous application of environmental laws.

Role of Technology in Environmental Governance
The court addressed the potential of technology in enhancing waste management systems. The directive to reactivate the grievance redressal app developed by the National Informatics Centre (NIC) for the Municipal Corporation signifies the judiciary’s recognition of technology as a tool for improving governance and facilitating public participation in environmental conservation. This move towards digital governance is expected to streamline the reporting and management of environmental grievances, making the process more efficient and transparent.

Conclusion

The comprehensive nature of the Himachal Pradesh High Court’s order sets a significant precedent for environmental justice in India. It showcases the judiciary’s proactive role in addressing complex environmental challenges through detailed directives and the promotion of sustainable practices. Moreover, the order reflects a holistic approach to environmental governance, considering the ecological, social, and economic dimensions of waste management. By mandating collaboration among various stakeholders, including government bodies, industries, and communities, the court’s decision fosters a collective responsibility towards environmental stewardship.

This order not only aims to enhance the ecological well-being of Himachal Pradesh but also serves as a model for other states grappling with similar environmental challenges.

Archives

Below is the list of reports published about the case “Suleman Vs Union of India” CWP 2369 of 2018.

ORDER 23 MARCH 2024Download
Unknown's avatar

Published by lawumbrella

Advocate Deven Khanna, an alumnus of the esteemed National Law School, is currently engaged in legal practice at the High Court of Himachal Pradesh and the Supreme Court of India. His practice primarily focuses on areas such as Civil liberties, Constitutional law, Writs, Labour and Service matters, Public Interest Litigations, and Bail matters. His academic contributions include articles in national journals, judging moot courts, and presentations at various legal conferences. He is committed to advancing legal education. For inquiries, he can be contacted at khannadeven@gmail.com or on mobile at 7018469792.