1. - An analysis
BBMP’s decision
to
Stop garbage-collection from apartments

2. Part-1
Is this decision legal?

3. 1. Stopping garbage-collection is violation of law
• BBMP is law-bound to collect garbage, as per the Municipal Solid Wastes
(Management and Handling) Rules, 2000.
• Clause 4 and Schedule-II clearly define that BBMP is solely responsible for
collection, segregation, recycling and disposal; and even for development of
the required infrastructure (with prior approval from KSPCB).

4. 1. Stopping garbage-collection is violation of law
Therefore, when BBMP states that the so-called “bulk generators” would have to
make their own arrangements, it is a direct violation of its BASIC obligation!
MSWM&H Rules, 2000, Section-II:
1. Collection of municipal solid wastes:
The following steps shall be taken by the municipal authority:
i. Organising house-to-house collection of municipal solid wastes through any of
the methods, like community bin collection (central bin), house-to-house
collection,...
v. Collected waste from residential and other areas shall be transferred to
community bin by hand-driven containerised carts or other small vehicles;
MSWM&H Rules, 2000, Section-II:
1. Collection of municipal solid wastes:
The following steps shall be taken by the municipal authority:
i. Organising house-to-house collection of municipal solid wastes through any of
the methods, like community bin collection (central bin), house-to-house
collection,...
v. Collected waste from residential and other areas shall be transferred to
community bin by hand-driven containerised carts or other small vehicles;
MSWM&H Rules, 2000, Section 7:
Management of municipal solid wastes
1. Any municipal solid waste generated in a city or a town, shall be managed and
handled in accordance with the compliance criteria and the procedure laid
down in Schedule-Il.
MSWM&H Rules, 2000, Section 7:
Management of municipal solid wastes
1. Any municipal solid waste generated in a city or a town, shall be managed and
handled in accordance with the compliance criteria and the procedure laid
down in Schedule-Il.

5. 2. MSWM&H Rules: Now and in future
Summary:
1. Current prevention of littering clauses of KMCA added to MSWM&H
2. Owner's responsibility limited to 'wet/dry' segregation at his premises
3. Community bins made mandatory for residential/commercial complexes.
4. BBMP has to collect domestic, trade and institutional waste
(No “bulk generators” approach allowed at all!)
5. BBMP has to collect waste from source
(either “door-to-door” OR “community bin” methods)
6. Segregation will be BBMP's responsibility (not public's)
7. BBMP can employ own staff, NGOs, CBO, private sector, etc. for collection.
BBMP can levy user charges for this.
Recommendations by the Sub-committee for
National Sustainable Habitat Standards for Municipal SWM
Ministries of Urban Development and Environment & Forestry
Recommendations by the Sub-committee for
National Sustainable Habitat Standards for Municipal SWM
Ministries of Urban Development and Environment & Forestry
The “sustainable habitat” version of the MSWM&H Rules simply re-affirms the existing
provisions, which means the current version does not need any reforms.

6. 2. The National Commission recommends...
18 Sanctions against municipal authority failing to comply with MSW Rules,
2000 or Provision of this Act.
If the Municipal Authority fails to discharge its obligatory functions under MSW Rules,
2000 or the direction given in aforesaid provisions of the Act, on the recommendation
of the State Pollution Control Board, or on its own, the State Govt. may impose
penalty on the Municipal Authority in the form of deduction of Govt. grants
(State/Central) ranging from Rs. 50000 to 5 lacs per month till they comply with the
aforesaid directions and those contained in the MSW Rules, 2000.
This would be besides the legal action that could be taken against the Municipal
Authorities under provisions of Environmental Protection Act, 1986 and the MSW
Rules, 2000. The Municipal Authorities, may in turn, fix the responsibility of officers
and staff for non-performance and impose punishment as deemed appropriate.

7. 3. BBMP has invented “bulk waste generators”
• BBMP has invented a “Bulk waste generators” category.
BBMP Commissioner’s statement to the Karnataka High Court:
Bulk waste generators, like apartments, hotels and wedding halls, have been
given two months to make their own arrangements, like setting up of biogas
plants or composting units on their premises, to dispose of garbage.
They have to make arrangements to transport garbage before December end
otherwise action will be taken against them.
BBMP Commissioner’s statement to the Karnataka High Court:
Bulk waste generators, like apartments, hotels and wedding halls, have been
given two months to make their own arrangements, like setting up of biogas
plants or composting units on their premises, to dispose of garbage.
They have to make arrangements to transport garbage before December end
otherwise action will be taken against them.
Note this word:
“Garbage”, not “filth”!
Agency Binding legal document
BIS / MoEF
(national level)
● National Building Code, 2005
● MSWM&H Rules, 2000
Karnataka State
(state level)
● KMCA, 1976
BBMP
(city/locality level)
● Bangalore Building Bye-laws, 2003
None of these requires us to do composting/transporting!

8. 3. No law defines “bulk waste generators”
• There is no definition of “bulk waste generators” anywhere-
– Municipal Solid Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules, 2000
– Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976.
• BBMP is responsible for handling any quantity of "municipal solid waste”.
MSWM&H Rules, 2000, Section 3.xv:
"municipal solid waste" includes commercial and residential wastes
generated in a municipal or notified areas in either solid or semi-solid form
excluding industrial hazardous wastes but including treated bio-medical
wastes.
MSWM&H Rules, 2000, Section 3.xv:
"municipal solid waste" includes commercial and residential wastes
generated in a municipal or notified areas in either solid or semi-solid form
excluding industrial hazardous wastes but including treated bio-medical
wastes.
MSWM&H Rules, 2000, Section 7:
Management of municipal solid wastes
1. Any municipal solid waste generated in a city or a town, shall be
managed and handled in accordance with the compliance criteria and
the procedure laid down in Schedule-Il.
MSWM&H Rules, 2000, Section 7:
Management of municipal solid wastes
1. Any municipal solid waste generated in a city or a town, shall be
managed and handled in accordance with the compliance criteria and
the procedure laid down in Schedule-Il.

9. 4. KMCA addresses ONLY filth (not garbage)
KMCA
255 Provision for removal of filth
256 Public notice ordering deposit of rubbish and filth by occupier
257 Removal of rubbish and filth accumulating in large quantities on premises
258 Provision for daily cleaning of streets and removal of rubbish and filth
259 Rights of property of corporation in things deposited in receptacles
260 Directions as to removal of rubbish and filth
263 Prohibition against accumulation of rubbish and filth on premises.
KMCA
255 Provision for removal of filth
256 Public notice ordering deposit of rubbish and filth by occupier
257 Removal of rubbish and filth accumulating in large quantities on premises
258 Provision for daily cleaning of streets and removal of rubbish and filth
259 Rights of property of corporation in things deposited in receptacles
260 Directions as to removal of rubbish and filth
263 Prohibition against accumulation of rubbish and filth on premises.
MSWM&H Rules Schedule II
1. Collection of Municipal solid waste
1. Littering of municipal solid waste shall be prohibited in cities, towns and in urban
areas notified by the State Governments.
MSWM&H Rules Schedule II
1. Collection of Municipal solid waste
1. Littering of municipal solid waste shall be prohibited in cities, towns and in urban
areas notified by the State Governments.

10. 4. Confusion between “Solid waste” & “Filth”
“Filth” = Foul-smelling putrid (rotting) matter“Filth” = Foul-smelling putrid (rotting) matter
(wet) Solid Waste(wet) Solid Waste

11. 4. What is accumulated filth?
Practical examples of “Accumulated Filth”, as covered by KMCAPractical examples of “Accumulated Filth”, as covered by KMCA
Obviously, this does not apply to wet/dry waste generated by apartments!

12. 5. KMCA does NOT override MSWM&H Rules!
• The BBMP notices refer to “power given by” Sections 256, 257 and 260 of
the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act 1976.
However, these sections are in context of Section 255, which requires
BBMP to set up convenient garbage-collection points.
• Further, these sections are to prevent the accumulation of filth, NOT daily
generation of garbage. (“Garbage” and “filth” are two different things!)
• These sections require the owner to collect the accumulated filth and bring it
to a receptacle provided by BBMP within 50m. After that, his responsibility
ends.
• It does not force the owner to use (or pay for-) private contractors.
• It does not specify that the owner has to manage (or transport-) his own
garbage.
• It does not set any specific limit on the garbage generated on daily basis.
• It does not even apply to apartments!
To sum up, none of the KMCA clauses can override the MSWM&H Rules.
They do NOT empower BBMP to stop garbage collection!

13. 6. Who is expected to ensure compliance?
KSPCB is supposed to monitor compliance to MSWMH Rules (Ref: clause 6.1, 8.1).
MSWM&H Rules, 2000, Clause 6:
1. The State Board or the Committee shall monitor the compliance of the standards
regarding ground water, ambient air, leachate quality and the compost quality
including incineration standards as specified under Schedules II, III and IV.
MSWM&H Rules, 2000, Clause 6:
1. The State Board or the Committee shall monitor the compliance of the standards
regarding ground water, ambient air, leachate quality and the compost quality
including incineration standards as specified under Schedules II, III and IV.
MSWM&H Rules, 2000, Clause 5:
The Secretary in charge of the Department of Urban Development of the
concerned State shall have the overall responsibility for the enforcement of the
provisions of these rules in the metropolitan cities.
MSWM&H Rules, 2000, Clause 5:
The Secretary in charge of the Department of Urban Development of the
concerned State shall have the overall responsibility for the enforcement of the
provisions of these rules in the metropolitan cities.
The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986:
5. The State Government may issue directions in writing to any person, officer or
any authority; and such person, officer or authority shall be bound to comply
with such directions.
The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986:
5. The State Government may issue directions in writing to any person, officer or
any authority; and such person, officer or authority shall be bound to comply
with such directions.

14. The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986:
15. Penalty for contravention of [...] Orders and directions.
(1) Whoever fails to comply with or contravenes this Act/Rules/orders/directions
issued thereunder ... shall be punishable with imprisonment up to 5 years, or a
fine up to Rs. 1 lakh, or both.
If the failure or contravention continues, additional fine up to Rs. 5000/day during
which such failure or contravention continues after the conviction for the first such
failure or contravention.
(2) If the failure or contravention continues beyond a period of 1 year after the date of
conviction, the offender shall be punishable with imprisonment up to 7 years.
The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986:
15. Penalty for contravention of [...] Orders and directions.
(1) Whoever fails to comply with or contravenes this Act/Rules/orders/directions
issued thereunder ... shall be punishable with imprisonment up to 5 years, or a
fine up to Rs. 1 lakh, or both.
If the failure or contravention continues, additional fine up to Rs. 5000/day during
which such failure or contravention continues after the conviction for the first such
failure or contravention.
(2) If the failure or contravention continues beyond a period of 1 year after the date of
conviction, the offender shall be punishable with imprisonment up to 7 years.
6. What are the penalties for non-compliance?

15. The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986:
17. Offences by government departments:
(1) Where an offence under this Act has been committed by any Department of
Government, the Head of the Department shall be deemed to be guilty of the
offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
Provided that nothing contained in this section shall render such Head of the
Department liable to any punishment if he proves that the offence was committed
without his knowledge or that he exercise all due diligence to prevent the
commission of such offence.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where an offence under
this Act has been committed by a Department of Government and it is proved
that the offence has been committed with the consent or connivance of, or is
attributable to any neglect on the part of, any officer, other than the Head of the
Department, such officer shall also be deemed to be guilty of that offence and
shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986:
17. Offences by government departments:
(1) Where an offence under this Act has been committed by any Department of
Government, the Head of the Department shall be deemed to be guilty of the
offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
Provided that nothing contained in this section shall render such Head of the
Department liable to any punishment if he proves that the offence was committed
without his knowledge or that he exercise all due diligence to prevent the
commission of such offence.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where an offence under
this Act has been committed by a Department of Government and it is proved
that the offence has been committed with the consent or connivance of, or is
attributable to any neglect on the part of, any officer, other than the Head of the
Department, such officer shall also be deemed to be guilty of that offence and
shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
6. What if the non-compliance is by BBMP?

16. 6. Is BBMP notice “due diligence”?
• The BBMP’s “Bulk Generators” notification affects 30 lakh people directly
and affects the health of 90 lakh people TODAY (many more in future).
• Was it placed in public domain for comments by experts and members of
public?
• The notice stops the garbage-collection with immediate/short notice,
without creating a private equivalent service that is evaluated and
certified by KSPCB.
• The apartments have no way to find a transporter who takes the garbage
to a KSPCB-approved garbage-processing facility.
• The BBMP corporator and health inspectors are clueless.
They admit (off the record) that the private contractor will dump the
garbage in unattended areas; not in KSPCB-certified landfills.

17. 7. So, how was the garbage-collection stopped?
1. Did BBMP take permission from Department of Urban Development and
KSPCB before deciding to stop garbage-collection?
2. In case of non-compliance to MSWMH Rules, KSPCB is expected to get the
Secretary in charge of the Department of Urban Development to enforce the
compliance.
Has KSPCB taken note of this non-compliance and acted?
3. If so, has the Secretary-DoUD ordered BBMP to comply with MSWM&H?
4. If so, has the KSPCB/Secretary-DoUD registered a case of non-compliance
against BBMP under The Environment (Protection) Act?
5. Will KSPCB wait till the test-results prove that the city environment is damaged
beyond acceptable limits?

18. 8. Garbage-collection by private parties
• If BBMP's own vehicles cannot handle the volume/type of garbage, it has
the freedom to hire additional services.
• But it cannot expect private citizens to shoulder this responsibility directly.
MSWM&H Rules, 2000, Clause 4:
Responsibility of municipal authority
1. Every municipal authority shall, within the territorial area of the municipality,
be responsible for the implementation of the provisions of these rules, and
for any infrastructure development for collection, storage, segregation,
transportation, processing and disposal of municipal solid wastes.
MSWM&H Rules, 2000, Clause 4:
Responsibility of municipal authority
1. Every municipal authority shall, within the territorial area of the municipality,
be responsible for the implementation of the provisions of these rules, and
for any infrastructure development for collection, storage, segregation,
transportation, processing and disposal of municipal solid wastes.

19. 9. Garbage plant retrofit violates safety norms!
• BBMP is pressing for retrofitting of garbage-processing plants in
apartments. But there is no free space for that in apartments.
They cannot be fitted in basement (gases) or terraces (corrosive leachate).

20. 9. Accumulated dry garbage is a threat to life!
• Storing dry combustible garbage in basement violates the safety norms
specified in Part IV (Life and fire safety) of the National Building Code
2005.
• Do we want to repeat the Carlton Tower blaze?

21. Part-2
Is this decision wise?
Is it in the public interest?

22. 1. Collection from apartments is far easier!
BBMP is ready to collect garbage from independent houses but not from
apartments.
Why??
Apartments collect and segregate garbage on their own. Individual houses don't.
• For example, a 200-unit apartment can deliver its entire garbage in seconds.
But BBMP trucks have to crawl along the road to serve 200 houses on a street.
Thus the apartment REDUCES garbage-collection effort by a factor of 200!
• Garbage-collection inside an apartment makes NO use of a public road.
On the other hand, the garbage-collection trucks serving the same number of
independent houses end up blocking the road.
But BBMP is frittering away this major advantage!
When it comes to transportation to processing plants, apartments have no better
capabilities as compared to independent houses. So forcing apartments to use
private means of transport has no advantage.

23. 2. Privatization will worsen the scene
• Let us consider the entire cycle of
"collection → segregation → recycling → disposal".
• Decentralization won't resolve any of the existing constraints
(shortage of trucks, landfill sites, transportation, or managerial resources)!
• It won't be easier to manage for the regulator (KSPCB)
• It won't comply to the standards.
– The local contractors dump garbage anywhere they can, instead of
taking it to specially designed landfills.
– Only BBMP's own operation can be trusted to operate in strict
compliance of laws, as they have no incentive to break the law and
take a short cut.

24. 3. People will suffer from new garbage Mafia!
• Privatization will create a new garbage Mafia.
• We are already suffering from the water-tanker Mafia, thanks to the failure of
the State to provide water.

25. 4. The composting idea is ill-conceived
If the apartments process the wet garbage locally, they will generate compost
that is 30% of the original volume of the wet garbage.
• A 200-unit apartment will produce 20 kg of compost every single day.
• Apartments in Bangalore will produce 800 MT of compost every single day.
How will they get rid of this vast quantity of compost?
Who has planned the logistics on a city-wide basis?
• Since it is no longer “garbage”, it is not BBMP's headache!

26. 5. Local garbage processing is not a cakewalk!
• Several apartments in Bangalore already have OWC system.
But still those RWCs are unwilling to operate them.
Clearly this activity has its pain points that has led to its abandonment.
• Although hard-core enthusiasts and new converts are operating such OWCs at
present, this enthusiasm may eventually peter out, unless an economic interest
is attached with it to make it an attractive proposition.
• Extracting a promise to process garbage from a handful builders is unfair.
Foisting BBMP's own responsibility on builders Is unethical.
(They have to agree to these terms just to get the OC.)

27. 6. The crisis is due to lack of governance
• The crisis developed because civic and regulatory bodies did not act in time.
Now the public is asked to pay the penalty for this lack of foresight, lapses
and even acts of omissions and commissions of these agencies!
Agency Problem
MoEF
(national level)
Why is the National Building Code 2005 not modified to add some
pre-conditions like a built-in garbage-processing plant?
KSPCB
(state level)
Nothing is done to reduce pollution systemically.
● No public-awareness programs
● No ban on plastic cups, jelly-filled diapers, etc.
● No tax cuts for technologies that causes less pollution
● No bans/taxes on businesses that generate high garbage volumes
(e.g. Pizza delivery, teleshopping websites)
● No re-engineering of high-pollution activities
● No subsidies to builders that meet the criteria
BBMP
(city/locality level)
● No quarterly meetings were held with citizens in each BBMP Ward
as specified in MSWM&H Rules.
● BBMP Engineers have allowed builders to violate FAR norms
(far less internal space is available for garbage treatment)
● BBMP Engineers have allowed encroachments on roads, and
buildings without their own parking; thus reducing free space on
the roads.

28. 7. Apartments end up paying too much!
• Apartments have to pay the common SWM costs through Property tax and
SWM cess; and then additionally pay for garbage-collection service.
They also spend money for the collection+segregation.
Thus the scheme is extremely unfair to the apartments.
Apartment
Independent
house
Quantity of garbage/day same
Quality of garbage same
Collection effort Self BBMP
Segregation effort Self BBMP
Transportation Self BBMP
This violates several principles stated in the National Environment Policy 2006.

29. National Environmental Policy, 2006 principles
Sl Title The Principle How it applies here...
4.v Economic
Efficiency
In various public actions for
environmental conservation, seek
to realize economic efficiency.
Give an economic value to the
services of environmental
resources. While analysing the
alternative courses of action, count
such value equally with the
economic values of other goods
and services.
In case of apartments, the costs of
segregation and collection are borne by
the dwellers. But in case of independent
houses, this cost is borne by BBMP.
In addition, BBMP is now proposing that
the apartments will have to pay for
transportation also!
While calculating the total SWM costs, the
contribution made by the apartments
must be counted; and they must be
compensated for the extra burden they
carry on behalf of BBMP.

30. National Environmental Policy, 2006 principles
Sl Title The Principle How it applies here...
(a) Polluter pays Production and consumption by
one party may impact third parties
who do not have a direct economic
nexus with the original act. In such
cases, make the perpetrator of the
impact bear the cost.
Since an average household causes the
same amount of pollution, each
house/apartment should pay the same
total amount. (The cost should be always
be in proportion to the pollution caused.)
However, BBMP has a skewed cost
structure that is unfair to apartments:
They have to pay the following costs-
1. Property tax
2. SWM Cess
3. Service charges for transportation.
4. Internal cost of collection
5. Internal cost of segregation.
Compared to this, the independent houses
don't have to pay the last three
components (BBMP bears those costs!)

31. National Environmental Policy, 2006 principles
Sl Title The Principle How it applies here...
(b) Minimize costs The economic costs of realizing
the benefits should be
minimized.
BBMP cannot unfairly pile costs on
apartments through different means:
Property tax, SWM cess, service charges.
Note that apartments are already
incurring additional internal costs for
collection and segregation of waste, which
BBMP bears for other houses.
The apartments are entitled to minimize
their SWM costs, and pay only what is a
fair share of the total burden.

32. National Environmental Policy, 2006 principles
Sl Title The Principle How it applies here...
4.vi Entities with
Incomparable
values
A conventional economic cost-
benefit analysis does not apply if
the activity results in significant
risks to human health, life, and
environmental life-support
systems, or unique natural and
man-made entities. Such risks
cannot be compensated in money.
Such entities would have priority in
allocation of societal resources for
their conservation without
consideration of direct or
immediate economic benefit.
This is what the Karnataka High Court
pointed out when BBMP claimed that they
saved Rs 200 Crore at the cost of letting
garbage accumulate in the city.
Indiscriminate dumping of waste by private
contractors in unapproved sites (and using
unapproved methods) also violates this
principle. That's why unregulated private
contractors must be banned.

33. Conclusions
• BBMP cannot stop the garbage-collection or palm off this responsibility to
citizens
• The notion of “bulk waste generators” is specious.
Please ask BBMP to countermand the notice.
• The apartments are bearing MUCH more than their share of SWM burden.
This must be rationalized. (BBMP must re-calculate property tax and cess.)
• BBMP must make a viable plan for garbage-handling; especially considering
that soon 50% of Indian population would be migrating to the cities; and
stress the system even more.