Bengaluru’s struggle with effective waste management has once again come under the spotlight, this time due to the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike’s (BBMP) delay in enforcing the mandatory user fee for solid waste management.
The issue has drawn the attention of the National Green Tribunal (NGT), which has repeatedly flagged the civic body’s inaction despite clear legal mandates and environmental guidelines. The Solid Waste Management (SWM) user fee, designed to promote the ‘Polluter Pays Principle’, was introduced as part of the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016. These rules, framed under the Environment Protection Act, 1986, require all waste generators households, commercial establishments, and institutions to contribute financially to waste collection and disposal. While the BBMP incorporated this provision into its SWM bye-law in 2020, its implementation has remained inconsistent, drawing legal and regulatory scrutiny. The NGT’s Principal Bench, based in Delhi, has issued multiple directives emphasizing the urgency of enforcing the user fee. The tribunal’s oversight committee, comprising environmental experts and a retired judiciary official, has consistently criticised BBMP for its failure to operationalise the fee, despite it being a statutory requirement. These concerns were highlighted in a recent internal note prepared by the BBMP, revealing the ongoing gaps in compliance with NGT directives.
The user fee policy was officially announced on April 1, following a budgetary allocation. Despite receiving approval from the Urban Development Department (UDD), the BBMP delayed its rollout, citing administrative bottlenecks and legal ambiguities. However, under the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016, the civic body possesses independent authority to impose the fee without external approval. Moreover, various Centrally sponsored schemes, including the Swachh Bharat Mission (Urban), mandate user fee collection as a precondition for receiving central funds. Legal experts argue that the delay undermines the fundamental principles of environmental governance. The NGT’s insistence on periodic reporting from state governments underscores the tribunal’s commitment to holding local bodies accountable for environmental compliance. The failure to enforce the user fee not only contravenes statutory requirements but also hampers efforts to achieve sustainable urban waste management.
The user fee system is rooted in the broader framework of the Environment Protection Act, 1986, which empowers the government to implement measures for controlling environmental pollution. The Ministry of Environment, Forest, and Climate Change issued the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016, to operationalise this mandate. Rule 4(3) specifically requires waste generators to pay a user fee, while Rule 15(f) mandates that local bodies collect this fee efficiently. Despite the legal framework, BBMP’s lack of action has raised questions about administrative efficiency and environmental accountability. Furthermore, the Swachh Bharat Mission (Urban) has linked user fee implementation to performance-based funding. Under its second phase, launched in 2021, urban local bodies were given a two-year window to implement the user fee to qualify for central financial support. Non-compliance with this directive could result in Bengaluru losing critical funding for waste management initiatives, potentially affecting the city’s standing in the Swachh Survekshan rankings, which assess cleanliness and waste management efficiency across Indian cities.
BBMP’s internal note also highlights the financial implications of the delay. The inability to collect user fees not only reduces revenue streams for waste management but also increases the financial burden on the city’s budget. As waste management costs escalate with the growing urban population, the lack of a sustainable funding mechanism poses significant challenges for the city’s environmental infrastructure. Experts in urban governance stress the need for robust administrative reforms to address these issues. They argue that effective waste management requires a holistic approach, combining regulatory enforcement with public awareness and community participation. The delay in implementing the user fee reflects broader systemic issues in Bengaluru’s urban governance, including bureaucratic inertia, inadequate stakeholder engagement, and fragmented policy enforcement.
As the NGT continues to monitor the situation, the BBMP faces mounting pressure to comply with environmental regulations. The tribunal’s focus on Bengaluru’s waste management practices highlights the broader challenge of integrating sustainable urban planning with effective environmental governance. The city’s experience serves as a critical case study for other urban centres grappling with similar waste management issues amid rapid urbanisation and climate change.
BBMP Delays SWM User Fee Despite NGT Orders
