‘Only paper work, no action’, Guj HC rebukes AMC for Sabarmati pollution
Updated: Sep 7th, 2024
During the hearing of the suo motu public interest litigation (PIL) regarding pollution in the Sabarmati River, the Gujarat High Court on September 6 reprimanded the officials of the Amdavad Municipal Corporation (AMC).
The division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Vaibhavi Nanavati, expressed severe displeasure after AMC failed to provide a concrete response regarding the cleaning of the Sabarmati River and the Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs).
The court stated, “All your claims are on paper. Every time, AMC makes promises but does not follow through. It seems like you want to turn a long-term plan into a super long-term one for cleaning the Sabarmati River. In reality, you lack the will to work. If you had the will, your approach wouldn’t be so indifferent.”
Monthly progress report
During the hearing, the court demanded a monthly progress report from AMC. The corporation stated, “We have already submitted two reports, and the third report is included in today’s affidavit.”
The court also questioned AMC about the STP upgrades, to which AMC responded, “We have taken steps regarding short-term solutions, including the initiation of two pumping stations.”
Regarding the capacity of the 106 MLD treatment plant, the court noted, “As per the mid-term plan, the work is expected to be completed by February 2025. However, since the tender hasn’t been issued yet, how could you inform the court that the work would begin in June? The Standing Committee has yet to make a decision. Every time, you list your issues but fail to show any progress. If your STPs are not operating at full capacity and you’re diverting 35 MLD of water, what impact does that have? This untreated water flows into the river.”
When AMC’s lawyers tried to discuss the project’s costs, the court interrupted, saying, “Don’t talk about costs; we are concerned about people’s lives. The progress made by AMC is unsatisfactory.”
AMC claimed that the short-term plan for the old Pirana STP has been completed and that the plant is operating at 100% capacity. The court asked if the Gujarat Pollution Control Board (GPCB) had inspected the STP. Court assistant Hemang Shah pointed out that the STP's operations do not meet National Green Tribunal Act (NGT) norms.
AMC also stated that illegal industrial connections have been removed. However, the court criticised AMC, noting that their Vasna STP is operating at half capacity. The court pointed out that new STPs are scheduled for 2026, 2027, and 2028, and AMC is currently diverting sewage effluent. “How can you claim to have a solution? Bypassing effluent is an ongoing issue for AMC,” the court remarked.
The court further added, “Industrial effluent is discharged into domestic STPs, and every time, you complain and cry about it. This issue has persisted for the last four or five years. However, you neither create a blueprint nor commit to a solution. You always come up with excuses and try to evade the court. You lack the will. If you had the will, your approach would not be so indifferent.”
AMC’s 100% claim
The court questioned why AMC uses the phrase ‘100%’ in its affidavits when nothing is being implemented.
“Every time you assure us with 100% in your affidavits, but nothing is being followed. Why do you write ‘100%’ when there’s no progress? From how you’re handling the case, it’s clear that you have no respect or regard for the court’s orders. You were supposed to take action, but you haven’t. The biggest issue is that you don’t accept your mistakes,” the court remarked, further warning AMC to be careful while filing affidavits, as oral instructions would not be accepted.
The court questioned the status of tenders and work orders, asking why only three new STPs are being built and what will happen to the existing ones.
AMC admitted, “We have failed in our responsibility”.
The court concluded, “You have failed in all aspects. There is no progress, only a painted picture. You speak of long-term solutions, but where is the progress? You fail to understand what the court expects from AMC.”
Also read:
