Water Crisis Spills Into NMC General Body

Nagpur: The first general body meeting on Friday turned into a stormy session, with mayor Neeta Thakre ordering repatriation of superintending engineer (PHE) Shweta Banerjee, a Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran (MJP) officer on deputation to the Nagpur Municipal Corporation, and issuing a sharp 15-day ultimatum to improve water supply across the city.The action came during the first meeting of the Nagpur Municipal Corporation (NMC) after the return of elected corporators, ending four years of administrator-led functioning. The House witnessed repeated uproar, with corporators from across party lines accusing the water supply department and Orange City Water Limited (OCWL) of failing to provide clean and regular water despite massive expenditure.After hearing complaints from several members, the mayor directed municipal commissioner Vipin Itankar to start the process of relieving Banerjee and repatriating her back to the parent department. Thakre also warned that the administration must show visible improvement in water supply within 15 days, failing which stricter action would follow.The meeting saw strong criticism not only from opposition members but also from corporators from the ruling side. Leader of opposition Sanjay Mahakalkar said the civic body spends around Rs300 crore annually on water supply, but still faces losses of nearly Rs78 crore every year. "If the corporation is incurring such losses, what is the benefit of the private company handling the system?" he asked.Mahakalkar also pointed out that the 24x7 water supply project, implemented through OCWL in 2012, was supposed to be completed within five years. However, the deadline was first extended to 2022, and even after that, the project remains incomplete, he said, adding citizens are still struggling for even basic supply.Corporators raised a series of complaints during the meeting, including dirty and contaminated water, low pressure, frequent supply cuts, and pending meter-related issues. BJP's Manoj Sable, Congress's Dinesh Yadav, and NCP (AP)'s Abha Pande also expressed concern over the deteriorating condition of the water supply system and said citizens have lost hope of getting 24x7 water supply despite the huge amount spent on the project. Displaying a bottle filled with dirty water, Pande also raised the issue of several residents receiving contaminated water in her prabhag.Banerjee admitted during the meeting that the corporation had paid over Rs251 crore to OCWL in the last two financial years, while only about Rs10 crore had been withheld even after consistent failures in providing desired service, triggering further anger among members.The mayor said water supply is a basic civic service and the newly elected House would not tolerate continued negligence. She directed the administration to hold a special review meeting on water supply within 15 days and submit a detailed progress report to the House.Thakre said a meeting had already been held with officials over the issue of increased water bills, but no concrete action was taken. "Officials cannot merely talk about penalties; they must resolve the problem," she said, warning negligence will invite action and the officer concerned may even be sent back to the state govt.She also warned that if issues like inflated bills, contaminated water, leakages and shutdowns are not resolved within 15 days, strict action will be taken against the water supply company. A special meeting on drinking water issues will also be convened within 15 days. BOX: ‘Bills revised without commissioner's nod'In another major revelation, superintending engineer Shweta Banerjee admitted in the House that water tariff had been revised 5% upwards without the approval of municipal commissioner. As per bylaws, only the commissioner is authorised to take a decision on tariff revision, but the bills were allegedly revised by bypassing the procedure.Corporators claimed several residents are now receiving bills up to 50% higher than their previous bills, triggering strong anger in the House and raising serious questions over how the revision was implemented.