The Karnataka High Court on Monday asked the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) and State government to reconsider the penalties imposed on violators of the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit noted that in the four years between September 10, 2019, and August 31, 2023, Rs 11.66 crore had been collected in penalties from 3.84 lakh Solid Waste Management (SWM) violators. The court observed that the amount collected from each violator as a penalty seemed too low to serve as a deterrent effectively.
It suggested that the BBMP and the state government should revisit this aspect and consider alternative measures for deterrence, such as initiating penal actions against violators under appropriate provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Furthermore, the court clarified that the user fee levied under Rule 15F of the SWM Rules does not require prior permission from the State government. It encouraged the BBMP to take appropriate steps in this regard.
The division bench emphasized the need for waste segregation in metropolitan cities like Bengaluru, especially in apartments and cooperative housing societies. It directed the BBMP to take action against violators, including apartment owners, flat owners, or cooperative society members, and to address the issue of biomedical waste generated by hospitals in the city.
The BBMP was directed to submit a fresh report providing necessary details on these aspects during the next hearing. The Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB) was also asked to provide its perspective and details of actions taken in response to the matter.
Finally, the court suggested involving citizens in the process and promoting public awareness through various means, including digital platforms and FM channels.
These directions were given during a hearing of batch of petitions that raised concerns about non-compliance with rules and the illegal dumping of unprocessed solid waste by the corporation in quarries, causing environmental damage.
The court then scheduled the matter for further consideration after four weeks.
