Ear to the ground

Can the courts save India's rivers from pollution? Tirupur shows the answer is no

The second part of a series from Tamil Nadu tracing the course of Noyyal, a tributary of the Cauvery.

A slum sprawled on one side of the river. In the distance, a factory belched smoke in the air. The riverbed was overrun with weeds and crammed with plastic bags that were half buried into the earth. An earthmover scooped gunk from an open drain and dumped it on top of the debris. The river itself was a thin trickle of black.

Welcome to Tirupur, an industrial city in central Tamil Nadu, where India's judicial system tried – and failed – to save a river.

The Noyyal is a small river which starts in the western ghats and flows 170 kilometres to merge into the Cauvery. It passes through Tirupur, where factories have been emptying out effluents in its waters ever since a textile hub came up in the 1970s.

After the state failed to protect the river, in 1996, the Supreme Court intervened. It ordered dyeing units in Tirupur to shut down if they could not stop polluting the river. Fifteen years later, in 2011, the Madras High Court followed up by applying the "Polluter Pays" principle, directing the dyeing factories to become zero discharge units by recycling waste water and pumping it back for reuse.

Since then, the larger units in Tirupur have set up their own effluent treatment plants. The smaller ones have come together to set up Common Effluent Treatment Plants. In all, 18 CETPs are operating here.

But the river still does not look clean.

The first part of this series flagged how the state administration in Tamil Nadu has been unable to protect the Noyyal. That story traced the river's journey from its source till Coimbatore.

This story looks at what happens to the Noyyal after it leaves Comibatore, and why even judicial remedies to protect the river have failed.

The view from Tirupur

The centrality of garments in Tirupur shows up in a million different ways.

Walk down its residential colonies and you will see tiny factories with people sewing or stitching away. A restaurant in a city hotel is called “T-Shirt”, and its outdoor section, “Wind-cheater”.

For the most part, the cluster is small-scale. S Sakthivel, the executive secretary of the Tirupur Exporters Association puts the number of small and medium units in the city to about 7,000.

At the end of a dirt track that parallels the river bank, stand a few dyeing units. The first has a large shed where bales of cream-coloured fabric are being fed into a long machine. The fabric passes through and comes out from the other end a beautiful indigo.

The owner of the company, who spoke on the condition of not being identified, said the CETP is too costly. He pays anywhere between Rs 12 lakh-Rs 15 lakh each month for effluent treatment. This is a problem because his company's turnover is Rs 12 crore. In an industry as cut-throat as garment export, the Rs 1.4 crore-Rs 1.8 crore that he puts aside for water treatment wipes out most of his margins.

Later in the day, at the CETP at Rayapuram which services this dyeing unit, it becomes clearer why treatment costs are so high. Initially, said a manager at the plant, 31 companies used to get their waste water treated here. Now, only 14 companies do. Seventeen have shut down. This means the running cost of the plant is now spread over a smaller number of dyeing units.

Garbage is dumped alongside the river. Photo by M Rajshekhar.
Garbage is dumped alongside the river. Photo by M Rajshekhar.

As it is, when units in a cluster are told to get their effluent treated, they cannot compete with those polluting freely. The owner had said: “In Gujarat, they dump raw effluent into the river. Right now, we have a gross margin of about 15%. If we were in Gujarat, that would be 30%.”

This has resulted in some predictable outcomes. Some units, said S Senthilanthan, an academic in Tirupur who has been studying the Noyyal, resettled outside Tirupur and kept polluting as before. The ones that stayed found the costs of using the CETPs kept rising. This created an incentive to try and bypass the CETP and dump waste directly into the Noyyal.

That is not all. After cleaning the waste water by passing it through multiple membranes, the CETPs are eventually left with a slurry. In the early days after the High Court order, there was no disposal system for this reject. A 2014 report by Bangalore-based Ashoka Trust For Research in Ecology and the Environment (commonly known as “Atree”) said: “The reject from all the CETPs was simply being dumped locally... In effect, the entire pollutant load was being released back into the Noyyal in 2009, and the expensive CETP performed no real pollution-reduction function at all.”

It adds: “To what extent this issue has been rectified today is unclear. During our field visits, we found sites where the sludge was being dewatered and dumped in various places.... It appears that the government has not sanctioned an official dumping site. Our field visits and conversations with farmers suggest that dumping effluents into abandoned borewells might be an approach that some industries are adopting.”

Agrees Senthilanathan: “There is no clear protocol on what to do with the slurry. Some of it goes to solar evaporation ponds. But when it rains, they might overflow. There is also the risk of seepage and groundwater contamination.”

As it is, dyeing units are not the only source of pollution in Tirupur. Washing and printing units also release waste water, a businessman pointed out. In addition, effluent is also released by households, eateries and other businesses like automobile workshops. Not to mention unauthorised dyeing units which operate on a very small scale. These work out of residential areas and discharge their wastewater into the local drains. Their waste, said the businessman, flows straight into the river.

Why, then, did the High Court direct only the dyeing units to set up CETPs?

According to D Nagasaila, a lawyer in the Madras High Court who fought the Tirupur case on behalf of the farmers living downstream, the case shows the limitations. “In their petition, the farmers had only mentioned the dyeing industry,” she said. Working with their understanding of the problem, that is how they had defined the source of pollution. And the judges, working with just the information given to them, had cracked down only on the dyeing units.

It makes you wonder if the government should have set up the CETPs instead of putting the onus on individual units.

The consequences of such decisions are visible at Orathupalayam.

From Tirupur to Orathupalayam

From Tirupur, the Noyyal flows to the Orathupalayam dam.

Commissioned in 1992, this is one of the most polluted reservoirs in India. For years together, its floodgates were not opened – given farmers' fears about pollution.

In August 2005 , taking the advantage of heavy rains, the floodgates were opened to flush the reservoir. The exercise deposited over 0.5 million cubic feet of toxic effluents in the Cauvery and yielded more than 400 tonnes of dead fish and a reservoir bed that was several metres thick with toxic sludge.

Six years later, the High Court passed an order imposing the zero liquid discharge rule – essentially telling the dyeing units to reduce their wastewater discharge down to zero.

The Orathupalayam dam. Photo by M Rajshekhar.
The Orathupalayam dam. Photo by M Rajshekhar.

But, as we see, zero discharge is not quite working. And so, how is the dam doing?

At a tea shop about two kilometres from the dam, villagers say their groundwater is salty and dark in colour. They do not drink it. There is no farming for five kilometres on either side of the river. People in the village – farmers once upon a time – now do job work in Tirupur.

A dirt track takes us towards the dam. Walk up its wall and you gaze down on a reservoir where nothing grows but the scrub tree of Prosopis juliflora. Look downstream and you see black water oozing out of the floodgates. A white foam floats on it.

It is a far cry from the stream that existed 130 km ago – one with water pure enough to drink.

From here, the ravaged river flows on for another 40 km before dissolving into the Cauvery.

If the Noyyal is affected by over-extraction of water and industrial pollution, other rivers in the state are struggling due to sand mining. Later in this series, a look at why sand mining is so rampant in Tamil Nadu.

You can read the first story about the Noyyal here. The entire Ear to the Ground series is available here.

We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content  BY 

As India turns 70, London School of Economics asks some provocative questions

Is India ready to become a global superpower?

Meaningful changes have always been driven by the right, but inconvenient questions. As India completes 70 years of its sovereign journey, we could do two things – celebrate, pay our token tributes and move on, or take the time to reflect and assess if our course needs correction. The ‘India @ 70: LSE India Summit’, the annual flagship summit of the LSE (London School of Economics) South Asia Centre, is posing some fundamental but complex questions that define our future direction as a nation. Through an honest debate – built on new research, applied knowledge and ground realities – with an eclectic mix of thought leaders and industry stalwarts, this summit hopes to create a thought-provoking discourse.

From how relevant (or irrelevant) is our constitutional framework, to how we can beat the global one-upmanship games, from how sincere are business houses in their social responsibility endeavours to why water is so crucial to our very existence as a strong nation, these are some crucial questions that the event will throw up and face head-on, even as it commemorates the 70th anniversary of India’s independence.

Is it time to re-look at constitution and citizenship in India?

The Constitution of India is fundamental to the country’s identity as a democratic power. But notwithstanding its historical authority, is it perhaps time to examine its relevance? The Constitution was drafted at a time when independent India was still a young entity. So granting overwhelming powers to the government may have helped during the early years. But in the current times, they may prove to be more discriminatory than egalitarian. Our constitution borrowed laws from other countries and continues to retain them, while the origin countries have updated them since then. So, do we need a complete overhaul of the constitution? An expert panel led by Dr Mukulika Banerjee of LSE, including political and economic commentator S Gurumurthy, Madhav Khosla of Columbia University, Niraja Gopal Jayal of JNU, Chintan Chandrachud the author of the book Balanced Constitutionalism and sociologist, legal researcher and Director of Council for Social Development Kalpana Kannabiran will seek answers to this.

Is CSR simply forced philanthropy?

While India pioneered the mandatory minimum CSR spend, has it succeeded in driving impact? Corporate social responsibility has many dynamics at play. Are CSR initiatives mere tokenism for compliance? Despite government guidelines and directives, are CSR activities well-thought out initiatives, which are monitored and measured for impact? The CSR stipulations have also spawned the proliferation of ambiguous NGOs. The session, ‘Does forced philanthropy work – CSR in India?” will raise these questions of intent, ethics and integrity. It will be moderated by Professor Harry Barkema and have industry veterans such as Mukund Rajan (Chairman, Tata Council for Community Initiatives), Onkar S Kanwar (Chairman and CEO, Apollo Tyres), Anu Aga (former Chairman, Thermax) and Rahul Bajaj (Chairman, Bajaj Group) on the panel.

Can India punch above its weight to be considered on par with other super-powers?

At 70, can India mobilize its strengths and galvanize into the role of a serious power player on the global stage? The question is related to the whole new perception of India as a dominant power in South Asia rather than as a Third World country, enabled by our foreign policies, defense strategies and a buoyant economy. The country’s status abroad is key in its emergence as a heavyweight but the foreign service officers’ cadre no longer draws top talent. Is India equipped right for its aspirations? The ‘India Abroad: From Third World to Regional Power’ panel will explore India’s foreign policy with Ashley Tellis, Meera Shankar (Former Foreign Secretary), Kanwal Sibal (Former Foreign Secretary), Jayant Prasad and Rakesh Sood.

Are we under-estimating how critical water is in India’s race ahead?

At no other time has water as a natural resource assumed such a big significance. Studies estimate that by 2025 the country will become ‘water–stressed’. While water has been the bone of contention between states and controlling access to water, a source for political power, has water security received the due attention in economic policies and development plans? Relevant to the central issue of water security is also the issue of ‘virtual water’. Virtual water corresponds to the water content (used) in goods and services, bulk of which is in food grains. Through food grain exports, India is a large virtual net exporter of water. In 2014-15, just through export of rice, India exported 10 trillion litres of virtual water. With India’s water security looking grim, are we making the right economic choices? Acclaimed author and academic from the Institute of Economic Growth, Delhi, Amita Bavisar will moderate the session ‘Does India need virtual water?’

Delve into this rich confluence of ideas and more at the ‘India @ 70: LSE India Summit’, presented by Apollo Tyres in association with the British Council and organized by Teamworks Arts during March 29-31, 2017 at the India Habitat Centre, New Delhi. To catch ‘India @ 70’ live online, register here.

At the venue, you could also visit the Partition Museum. Dedicated to the memory of one of the most conflict-ridden chapters in our country’s history, the museum will exhibit a unique archive of rare photographs, letters, press reports and audio recordings from The Partition Museum, Amritsar.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Teamwork Arts and not by the Scroll editorial team.