A Hope of Clean Cities: Why India's New Waste Laws maybe More Than Just Paperwork
Poor waste management and lack of basic sanitation has become a curse for cities throughout the Indian subcontinent, to the extent that it significantly affects the quality and expectancy of life of the citizens throughout the economic and social strata. Towering landfills like those in Ghazipur and Deonar are a source of collective shame and concern for each citizen of this nation. India generates over 62 million tonnes of waste annually, a figure projected to nearly triple by 2030. For decades, the legal response to this mounting crisis was fragmented and reactive, with a majority of the resources of local authorities being spent on collection and transportation of municipal waste to dumping grounds rather than its actual treatment. The government has made a significant change in its policy through the promulgation of Solid Waste Management Rules, 2026 (SWM Rules).
In the same vein, India's construction sector contributes to nearly 10% of the nation's GDP and has consistently grown at a rate of 11% over the last decade, significantly outpacing the global average of 5.5%. However, this rapid development produces massive volumes of high-density debris that often goes unnoticed by the public. Let us suppose that an existing structure is demolished for reconstruction and material is brought in to build a new structure at its place (wholly or partially). Then there would be generated a substantial quantity of homogeneous high-density mixture as a result of the demolition of the existing structure, this mixture contains concrete, bricks, wood, metals, sand, gravel and other material like asbestos and plastics which may overtime leech into the air or ground water to cause serious health problems. If this waste however, is utilized correctly then it may become a major source of cheap building material which would enormously mitigate the environmental and public health implications. This is exactly what the new Construction and Demolition Waste Management Rules, 2025 (C&D Rules) attempt to do.
Far from being administrative guidelines, these rules are ambitious instruments of delegated legislation promulgated by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (“MoEF”) under the powers conferred to it under Section 3, 6 and 25 of the Environment Protection Act, 1986.
The Prevailing Problems With The Current Waste Management Regime
Despite an already existing extensive policy framework on paper, Indian cities still continue to rank among the most polluted globally. While it is true that India is undergoing rapid industrialisation, and that even countries like Japan experienced comparable sanitation and urban management challenges during similar phases of development, the distinctive structural and administrative features of the Indian system must be carefully examined in order to come up with a solution. The earliest instance of the judiciary wrestling with the widespread issue of waste management policy was in Almitra H. Patel v. Union of India[1], when a petition was filed before the Supreme Court in the backdrop of the 1994 Surat Plague, seeking issuance of writs against municipalities for implementation of a comprehensive Municipal Solid Waste policy. The background of this case is testament to how despite being conscious of the problems, local municipal officers mostly fail to secure budget as well as political support for any effective widespread solutions. The apex court mooted many ideas during the decade long proceeding like the privatization of garbage collection, imposition of fines for littering and appointment of magistrates to try the offences. However, after 18 years, the case was eventually transferred to the National Green Tribunal (“NGT”) which continues to monitor[2] the state-wise compliance as per the Supreme court's directives. However, the question still remains- Should a city which cannot manage to treat its solid waste be allowed to expand indefinitely?
Broadly speaking, the principal challenges that presently afflict the existing framework may be grouped into three categories-
Firstly, there is a gross lack of finances among the majority of Indian urban local bodies which rely completely upon state or central government grants to function, with certain exceptions like that of the Bombay Municipal Corporation, which manages a budget so large that it is rivals or even exceeds the total budgetary allocation of several other states combined. This issue can be directly attributable to the complete failure of Urban Bodies to raise funds for their own. The fee that they charge for their services like garbage collection, is minimal and citizens are reluctant to pay even that when they see the repulsive sanitary conditions of their surroundings.
Secondly, the rampant corruption which plagues the bodies in charge of maintaining sanitation and urban cleanliness. The scale of the problem becomes evident when one considers incidents such as the alleged ₹ 934 crore scam involving the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), where biometric audits reportedly uncovered thousands of ghost workers on the payroll. The majority of the homeowners of Indian cities evade property taxes by exploiting this corrupt system which further contributes to the lack of finances of the urban bodies. These instances illustrate that such irregularities are not aberrations but symptomatic of deeper structural deficiencies in urban governance.
Thirdly, the lack of urban planning of Indian cities makes it almost impossible for large scale garbage collection and disposal. Since ancient times, our cities have been a product of mass migrations for the better opportunities which they have to offer. However, as observed by the Supreme Court in Dipak Kumar Mukherjee v. Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Ors.[3], discrimination based upon cultural and language differences leads to systematic exclusion and depravation causing every fifth urban dweller to be forced to live in a slum and 90% of the migrant workers who are employed in the informal sector bearing the majority brunt of poor waste management and disease outbreaks. Even if one takes an aerial view of cities like Delhi, it paints a very grim picture, gullies which are narrow and suffocating with houses which allow no sunlight. It is not possible for any vehicles or machinery to enter and collect waste in such settlements which makes them a hub for unsanitary behaviours and poor civic sense.
The New Rules- A Welcome Change In Policy
Both of the new regulations represent a decisive upgrade to the 2016 framework and are intended to address long-standing deficiencies in the earlier regime through a rigorous structural overhaul. More importantly, it is essential to appreciate that the regulatory approach is transitioning from a largely advisory and suggestive model to a target-driven and enforceable compliance regime.
Extended Producer Responsibility
The most transformative new feature of these new rules maybe the introduction of Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), which is a regulatory framework that shifts the burden of waste management from the public to the private sector, legally requiring generators of waste to ensure that the refuse is recycled back into the economy rather than dumped in a landfill or into water bodies.
The Principal Bench of NGT, in the case of Aryavart Foundation v. Union of India[4], has directed the State and Central Pollution Control Boards to ensure strict compliance with EPR targets and the maintenance of real-time data on registration of producers and the process of treatment. The Tribunal has also issued suo motu directions laying emphasis on the integration of the informal sector, particularly in the plastic and e-waste category
The SWM Rules have made segregation at source mandatory. This categorization would be into wet waste, dry waste, sanitary waste, and special care waste, each of which has been expressly defined under the framework. The classification of Bulk Waste generators has also been put in place in the form of Extended Bulk Waste Generator Responsibility (EBWGR), for entities with floor area of 20,000 square metres or more, or water consumption of 40,000 litres per day or more, or solid waste generation of 100 kg per day or more. Bulk Waste Generators are now required to process wet waste on-site to as much extent as possible or alternatively obtain an EBWGR Certificate in case they are unable to.
Same is the case for the C&D Rules as well where developers with built-up area of 20,000 square meters or more are classified as “producers” which additionally puts a legal responsibility upon them to recycle a requisite percentage of the waste they generate. This threshold starts at 25% during the year 2025-26 and will increase to 100% by 2028-29.
Centralized Online Monitoring
The SWM Rules provide for the development of a Centralised Online Portal to track all stages of the solid waste management process from waste generation, collection, transportation, processing to adequate disposal, as well as, biomining and bioremediation of legacy waste dump sites. The registration and authorization process of waste processing facilities through local bodies and Pollution control boards has also been made completely online via this portal. The previous, multi-step physical reporting process has also been digitized through the online portal. Further, the new rules have provided for a mandatory audit of all waste processing facilities, the report of which shall be submitted to the same portal.
Complimenting the above is the new centralized online portal under the aegis of the Central Pollution Control Board envisaged under the C&D Rules. This portal facilitates mandatory registration for all key stakeholders like the producers, recyclers, collection point operators, and intermediate storage facilities. This portal would potentially also serve as a platform for monitoring waste flow, filing returns, auditing compliance and even trading EPR certificates. This evolved digital backbone is a stark improvement over the 2016 regime which relied entirely upon manual and decentralized enforcement and lacked any structured mechanism for tracking compliance.
Certificate Trading System (A curious feature unique to the C&D Rules)
The EPR certificate trading system is another newly added ambitious element which allows recyclers to generate certificates based upon the quantity and quality of waste which they process (with higher weightage for in-situ recycling), and then other producers can purchase these certificates to meet their own statutory annual targets. These certificates have been made tradeable within a regulated band, valid for three years and subject to audit by the CPCB. The 2016 rules offered no such market-based compliance tool.
However, no such option has been mentioned for the holders of EBWGR Certificates, which seems to be a missed opportunity as an updated carbon credit trading systems among the local authorities could have been put in place. However, the problem with such systems lie with the ease with which fake certificates can be generated in our nation.
Mandatory Obligation Upon Industries to utilize waste
In addition to all these recycling incentives, the SWM Rules define Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) as fuel which is produced by shredding and dehydrating municipal solid waste with high calorific value which primarily consists of non-recyclable plastic, paper and textiles. Industrial Units like cement plants that heavily rely upon solid waste have been mandated to incorporate RDF, with the substitution rate increasing from the current 5 per cent to 15 per cent over a six-year period.
Similarly, the C&D Rules also mandate the utilization of processed C&D waste in both construction and road building activities. Now, in all construction and road-building projects exceeding 20,000 sq. mt., both the state and centre must make use of a growing percentage of recycled waste, rising from 5% to 25% by 2030-31 depending upon the year of commencement.
Integration with Institutional Framework
Both the new rules move beyond merely assigning the responsibility to local authorities. While Urban Local Bodies continue to play an important role in setting up collection points and facilitating transportation of waste, the burden is now distributed uniformly across a structured hierarchy.
Under the revised SWM Rules, local authorities are responsible for the collection, segregation and transportation of solid waste in tandem with Material Recovery Facilities (MRFs) which will primarily act as facilities for sorting of solid waste. These facilities primarily function as centres for the sorting and processing of solid waste. Additionally, they may serve as designated deposition centres for e-waste, special care waste, sanitary waste, and other specified waste streams.
Under the C&D Rules, a Steering Committee has been constituted at the national level for oversight, dispute resolution and policy amendments, while a Monitoring Committees continue to operate at the state level to track compliance and assist in implementation. Several ministries have also been assigned responsibilities like Ministry of Jal Shakti being tasked rural awareness, and the Ministry of Commerce and Industry being responsible for listing recycled products on government procurement platforms.
It is deeply unfortunate, that it required a crisis to bring us to our senses, policy changes are only being brought in when garbage has begun to flood our streets and our air has become unbreathable. Segregation at source and recycling of high-density construction debris can only work when a large enough population effectively participates in the effort and the Municipal authorities actually follow through with the words of the Rules. These new obligations are very new for all the stakeholders involved and care must be taken, particularly in the first few year of implementation. However, the situation is of now or never as Indian cities have become unbearable and public sentiment is in favour of the vision of the government.
AIR 2000 SUPREME COURT 1256. ↑
In re: Compliance of Municipal Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016 and other Environmental Issues, Original Application No. 606/2018 (Main), National Green Tribunal (Principal Bench, New Delhi), Order dated May 18, 2023. ↑
2012 AIR SCW 5463. ↑
Original Application No. 32/2020, NGT, Principal Bench. ↑
Views are personal.