Can Maharashtra's rivers be saved from pollution?

Raju Korti
Rivers have sustained human civilisation for centuries. They provide drinking water, support agriculture, recharge groundwater and sustain ecosystems. In India they also carry deep cultural and spiritual significance. Yet many rivers today resemble drains rather than lifelines. Maharashtra’s decision to establish the Maharashtra State River Rejuvenation Authority appears to be an attempt to reverse this decline.

Mithi: Sight for sore eyes

The state cabinet recently approved the creation of this authority to oversee rejuvenation work on 54 polluted river stretches, the highest number recorded in any Indian state according to the Central Pollution Control Board’s 2025 report. The rivers include the Mithi, Kalu, Mula, Mula-Mutha, Mutha, Bhima, Pawana, Nag, Chandrabhaga and Panchganga.

These rivers represent both ecological and cultural heritage. Many such as the Bhima, Chandrabhaga and Panchganga hold sacred importance for millions of devotees. The Mithi river in Mumbai is an exception. Union Minister Nitin Gadkari once dismissed it as a mere “nullah”, reflecting the tragic condition to which it has been reduced.

The Maharashtra State River Rejuvenation Authority will function as the apex decision-making body and nodal agency for river restoration in the state. Chaired by the Chief Minister, it brings together ministers from environment, finance, urban development, water resources, industry and rural development.

In theory this structure solves a major administrative problem. River pollution involves many departments. Sewage management is handled by urban bodies. Industrial pollution falls under the pollution control board. Encroachments involve revenue authorities. Flood control is linked to water resources departments. Until now these agencies have worked in isolation. The new authority aims to coordinate them.

It will prepare river basin management plans, decide priority phases for rejuvenation, integrate existing schemes, and recommend policies on sewage treatment, industrial effluent control and riverbank demarcation. It will also address practical obstacles such as land acquisition, encroachments, power supply and project contracts.

A state executive committee and a dedicated secretariat will assist the authority. Environmental organisations such as the Bombay Natural History Society and the Mangrove Cell are expected to contribute technical inputs.

The state plans to raise about Rs 2,000 crore for river rejuvenation through the Pollution Control Board. The government itself will contribute Rs 100 crore, while 10 percent of revenue from minor mineral excavation will be diverted annually to the authority. Additional funding will be sought through corporate social responsibility contributions and blended finance. Whether this allocation is adequate remains debatable.

Cleaning polluted rivers is extremely expensive. Sewage treatment plants, interceptor drains, riverfront protection works and monitoring systems require large investments and continuous maintenance. In a state with 54 polluted stretches, Rs 2,000 crore could spread thin unless carefully prioritised. The key challenge is not only capital investment but also long-term operational costs. Treatment plants often fail because local bodies lack funds or technical capacity to maintain them.

The problems affecting Maharashtra’s rivers are neither mysterious nor recent. The causes are well documented. Untreated sewage is the largest contributor. Rapid urbanisation has overwhelmed municipal infrastructure. Many cities discharge partially treated or completely untreated sewage into rivers.

Industrial effluents add another layer of pollution. Chemical units, textile industries, sugar mills and small-scale factories often release contaminated wastewater. Solid waste dumping further degrades river health. Plastics, construction debris and household garbage frequently end up in river channels. Encroachments and urban construction narrow natural riverbeds and destroy floodplains. This reduces the river’s ability to cleanse itself and increases flooding risks. Agricultural runoff containing fertilisers and pesticides also contributes to declining water quality.

Few rivers illustrate the governance failures better than Mumbai’s Mithi river. Once a natural tidal river connecting Powai and Vihar lakes to Mahim creek, the Mithi gradually turned into a dumping channel for sewage and industrial waste. After the devastating 2005 Mumbai floods, the government launched an ambitious river cleaning and widening programme. Over the years, hundreds of crores of rupees were spent on desilting, embankment construction and beautification. Yet the river continues to remain choked with sludge and garbage.

Investigations and audits exposed irregularities in contracts and allegations of inflated bills in desilting operations. The project became synonymous with what many critics describe as the Mithi river desilting scam. For Mumbaikars the river still stands as a visible reminder of administrative failure. This history raises an uncomfortable question. If one river could not be restored despite years of attention and funding, can dozens of others be revived effectively?

India’s experience with the Clean Ganga campaign provides further caution. The Ganga Action Plan launched in 1985 and the later Namami Gange programme initiated in 2014 have together consumed billions of rupees and more than three decades of policy effort. Some improvements have been reported in certain stretches, but pollution levels remain stubbornly high in several cities including Varanasi.

Experts attribute the limited success to fragmented governance, weak enforcement against polluters, and poor maintenance of treatment infrastructure. The lesson is simple. River cleaning cannot succeed through announcements alone.

The new authority does address one important problem. It attempts to bring multiple departments under a single institutional framework. This could improve coordination and accountability. However, success will depend on three factors.

First, strict enforcement of pollution norms. Industries and municipalities must face penalties for illegal discharge. Second, functional sewage treatment systems. Building plants is not enough. They must operate efficiently every day. Third, protection of riverbanks and floodplains. Encroachments and construction near rivers must be prevented. Without these steps, rejuvenation efforts risk becoming symbolic exercises.

Governments alone cannot restore rivers. Citizens, industries, local bodies and environmental groups all have a role. Cities must manage waste responsibly. Industries must adopt cleaner technologies. Farmers must reduce chemical runoff. Citizens must stop dumping garbage into water bodies. Most importantly, rivers must be treated as living ecological systems, not as drainage channels.

If Maharashtra’s new authority can enforce this shift in thinking, it may succeed where many earlier efforts have faltered. If it becomes another bureaucratic layer without strong enforcement, the state’s rivers will continue their slow decline.

The stakes are high. Rivers are not merely water channels. They are the arteries of human life, carrying ecological, economic and cultural meaning across generations. Protecting them is not just an environmental task. It is a civilisational responsibility.