“Fining apartment owners for faulty sewage treatment plants is unjust”

who's responsible for a faulty stp?

An apartment STP. Pic credit: Dr Ananth S Kodavasal

The Honourable National Green Tribunal (NGT) of India, constituted under the NGT Act of 2010, bases all its directions and judgements on three basic tenets:

  • Sustainable development
  • Precautionary principle
  • Polluter pays

These tenets are considered the bedrock of jurisprudence in cases relating to the environment. I have absolutely no quarrel with any of these guiding principles. I have a question, however, on how the Hon. NGT defines and decides who the real polluter is, in case of dysfunctional sewage treatment plants (STPs) in apartments. Based on NGT’s directions, the State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB) has been issuing notices to apartments for running apparently-faulty STPs, and asking them to pay lakhs as environmental compensation.

It goes without saying that the source of pollution – the real polluter, the culprit if you will – is the STP itself. This is a no-brainer. Then the question is, who is responsible and to be made accountable for a defective, defunct STP.

Let us, therefore, delve deeper into the antecedents of the STP – the janam kundli of this poor thing.

Who sets up the STP?

The STP is first conceived by a less-than competent plumbing consultant, who is appointed by an architect. The architect would have been roped in by the developer to only get the necessary environmental clearances from government agencies. Quality, performance or longevity of the STP are not of prime concern here.

The plumbing consultant gets the STP design from his favoured vendor, with whom he shares a cosy relationship. And the final link in giving birth to the polluting STP – the midwife – is the government agency which  approves the defective technology, design and engineering of the STP.

Therefore, in the chain of events leading to a polluting STP, the following players have crucial role:

  1. The plumbing consultant who designed the STP in collaboration with his favoured vendor
  2. The vendor who in turn foists a mediocre STP on the plumbing consultant
  3. The architect who appointed them both without background verification or due diligence
  4. The builder who appointed the architect without verification or due diligence as well
  5. The government agency which approves the faulty STP scheme

What chance does the STP have in the hands of these parties with widely varying interests and agenda?

Please note that all the parties above have made money during this process – the consultant and architect his fees, the STP vendor his price; the builder who recovers his price from innocent buyers; the government agency that charges hefty fees for issuing CFE (Consent for Establishment) for the STP. In addition, BWSSB (Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board) levies high pro-rata charges for giving sanitary connections to apartments, though the latter are not allowed to discharge into the city’s sewerage network.

At the very end of this chain is the common citizen, who has paid a huge sum to buy his apartment. He’s now left holding the baby – the polluting STP.

NGT must hold real polluters responsible

This is not a one-time affair that the five agencies (mentioned earlier) may be pardoned, citing lack of knowledge, education or experience. It happens repeatedly, with the same set of players. They don’t want to learn from past mistakes and continue to foist defective STPs.

Clearly, these agencies, who have made money out of STPs, are the real polluters, and must be held accountable for defective STPs. I believe I am fairly well-qualified to propound my views on this subject, having been nominated a ‘subject expert on wastewater management’ in the Monitoring Cell constituted by the KSPCB under Hon. NGT’s directions.

These five agencies certainly cannot claim to be innocent bystanders because their STPs have failed repeatedly. In fact, as per the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, KSPCB would have legal liability for dysfunctional STPs.

Hon. NGT must hold these agencies as the prime polluters and recover environmental compensation from them. NGT must also apply the first principle of natural justice the Doctrine of Bias (no man should be judge in his own case) — so that innocent citizens are not held to ransom. KSPCB is one of the culpable entities, hence it should not be the agency that decides who the polluter is and who has to pay environmental compensation.

It is unfair, unjust and simply a miscarriage of natural justice if the last person in the chain – the innocent common citizen – is held responsible and branded a polluter. He is only a victim of his circumstances. He has paid his hard-earned money to these agencies and is quite simply at the receiving end of poor and deficient service.


WE WANT TO THANK YOU
for reading Citizen Matters, of course. It would be fantastic to be able to thank you for supporting us as well. For 12 years we have strived to bring you trustworthy and useful information about our cities. Because informed citizens are crucial to make a better city. Support Citizen Matters today.

DONATE NOW



About Ananth S Kodavasal 3 Articles
The author has not yet added any personal or biographical info to her or his author profile.

4 Comments

  1. Let the government manage all our sevage warter and run STPs wherever they want.we are redy to pay Rs.50000/ every month or 6,00,000/ a year.when they can manage all templs why can’t this.with my experience as a manager in an appartment for 6 yeras,it is highly impossible to manage builder made STPs.and get clear water.first collect water certificates from all the seevage plalnts run by govt if it comply with KSPCB norms,then they can levy penalty on us.STP in appartment is big headache and major component of our expenses.BWSSB has simply disconnected the UGD line in almost all appartments in Bangalore and leaving treated water to S W Drains will make entire Bangalore a sewage city,Let NGT take note of their rules.

  2. Please ask basic questions
    1) NGT order to fine the apartment who are not party to the petition is it not violations of fundamental rights
    2) KSPCB fine under which provision of law?
    3) KSPCB can only proscecute and court may fine
    4) apartment owners are occupaiers they are not violators (STP officially not transferred to RWA)
    6) in karantaka no RWA is position take control as they are not juristic person
    5) project manager or CFO holder need to be fined and or proscecuted but notice to occupiers is not law supported

    Every RWA should take this advantage of this notice and make builders and promoters responsible and legally ask for conveyance of title of land and assets to own such notices

    Anil Kalgi
    9448822238

  3. Any STP from Ganges to Bangalore, public or apartment owned, is a big blot on our engineers, architects , designers, builders and government agencies. But who cares as long as money is made…the hapless end customer wrings hands and spend more.
    Can we have a code of discipline and an honest enforcer…pipe dream ??

  4. Most of the apt owners have paid BWSSB Kaveri water charges. Yet they are forced to install multiple STPs in their complex. What happens to the crores of money collected? Does the builder pocket it or the civic authorities?? Even 35 years down the line many places who paid in full have no such facilities!!

Comments are closed.