CAG Audit Uncovers Critical Failures in Hyderabad's Waste Management
The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has identified significant deficiencies in solid waste management (SWM) within the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) and 15 urban local bodies (ULBs). The audit, covering the period from 2017-18 to 2021-22, exposes major gaps in waste collection, segregation, processing, and monitoring systems, raising serious concerns about environmental and financial accountability.
Financial Lapses and Unprocessed Waste Payments
In a startling revelation, the CAG report highlights that GHMC paid a staggering Rs 313.20 crore to a concessionaire for the treatment and disposal of 44.16 lakh metric tonnes of dry waste between February 2012 and July 2020. However, this payment was made despite the waste not being processed at all, indicating a severe oversight in contract enforcement and verification processes.
Furthermore, the concessionaire failed to establish a mandatory environmental protection fund as required under the environmental clearance issued by the State Level Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA). This omission underscores a lack of compliance with regulatory safeguards designed to protect the environment from potential hazards associated with waste disposal.
Weak Monitoring and Data Discrepancies
The audit found that monitoring by the Telangana State Pollution Control Board (TSPCB) was inadequate, with no effective oversight of compliance at the Jawaharnagar treatment and disposal facility. Additionally, there were significant discrepancies in waste data reported by TSPCB and the ULBs between 2019-20 and 2021-22, suggesting unreliable record-keeping and potential mismanagement.
Notably, the absence of weighbridges at Secondary Collection and Transfer Points (SCTPs) meant there was no system to verify the actual volume of waste generated or collected within GHMC limits before transportation to the Jawaharnagar facility. This lack of basic infrastructure compromises the accuracy of waste tracking and management efforts.
Segregation and Policy Shortcomings
Segregation of waste at different levels was either absent or only partially implemented in all the test-checked ULBs. The state and ULBs did not notify the classification of items as domestic hazardous waste and sanitary waste, leading to a failure in emphasizing the need for separate segregation. Consequently, mixed waste was transported to the Jawaharnagar facility in GHMC and to dumpsites in the other 14 ULBs, exacerbating environmental risks.
The audit also pointed out that the state's SWM policy lacks clarity, with no defined roles and responsibilities for personnel involved in waste management. It failed to adequately address the 3R principles—reduce, reuse, and recycle. While the state set a target to limit landfill waste to 20% of total waste generated, this was achieved only in GHMC, highlighting widespread underperformance.
Financial and Administrative Failures
GHMC did not make a periodical revision of user charges for household municipal solid waste (MSW) collection with an annual escalation based on the wholesale price index, as mandated. Variable rates based on waste generator categories were not notified, and the mechanism for collecting user charges from railway stations, MMTS, and metro stations was not reviewed. Additionally, GHMC failed to collect tipping fees of Rs 47.77 crore from nine ULBs, one gram panchayat, and the Secunderabad Cantonment Board.
The audit revealed that 14 ULBs failed to allocate adequate funds for SWM infrastructure and did not fully utilize funds under the Swachh Bharat Mission (Urban), leaving 37% of funds unspent as of March 2022. This underutilization hampers the development of necessary waste management facilities and services.
Construction and Demolition Waste Neglect
The state government had not notified a policy for Construction and Demolition (C&D) Waste Management as of September 2023. Although C&D waste processing plants were set up in GHMC at four locations, the GHMC Act, 1955, was not amended to include suitable provisions for C&D waste management. The 14 ULBs had neither identified suitable places for C&D waste disposal nor prepared comprehensive plans for setting up processing facilities, as mandated by the Telangana Municipalities Act, 2019.
Moreover, the concessionaire company did not operate the plant for C&D waste at full capacity, resulting in the accumulation of 3,51,186 MT of C&D waste at the Jeedimetla plant and 7,11,300 MT at the Fathullaguda plant as of March 31, 2022. This inefficiency contributes to environmental degradation and public health risks.
Conclusion
The CAG audit underscores systemic failures in solid waste management across GHMC and 15 ULBs in Telangana. From financial lapses and weak monitoring to policy shortcomings and neglect of C&D waste, the findings call for urgent reforms to enhance accountability, improve infrastructure, and ensure sustainable waste management practices. Addressing these issues is crucial for protecting public health and the environment in the region.
