New Delhi, Aug. 5 -- The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the Centre to come out with "structured" guidelines for imposing compensation for violations under the Solid Waste Management Rules observing that the same cannot be left to the discretion of regulatory bodies, tribunals and courts. In an attempt to make the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2026 effective, a bench of justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe formulated eight guiding principles based on judicial precedents and said, "We direct the ministry of environment forests and climate change (MoEFCC) to take into account the above-referred principles for determination and imposition of environmental compensation, as also the Rules that operate in the field, to formulate the necessary guidelines to be issued under Rule 17(2) of the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2026." The order was passed while examining a petition filed by Amravati Municipal Corporation against an order on solid waste management passed by the National Green Tribunal (NGT). The bench said, "It is high time that the determination and imposition of environmental compensation is not left to the discretion of regulatory bodies, tribunals, or courts. There must be a structured regime through which people will know with clarity and certainty, as to, for which type of environmental violation, what consequential punitive action will follow." The court was of the view that such a clarity will not only serve the purpose of deterrence but also inform the imminent consequence of a violation. It noted that Rule 17 of the 2026 Rules provide for determination, imposition and collection of compensation. However, in the absence of any framework for levying the compensation, the rule became ineffective. "Our endeavour is to institutionalise the process of solid waste management for our country," the bench said, adding that the mission to institutionalise solid waste management does not end with framing of the rules but to ensure its implementation. During the hearing of the case, the Centre informed the court that in March 2026, the Committee for Effective Implementation at the Central Level was constituted under the chairmanship of the Central Pollution Control Board chairperson. The bench said, "Our task is now to help the Central Implementation Committee to prepare and issue the necessary guidelines for imposition and collection of environmental compensation." The court culled out eight principles from past judicial verdicts to suggest that the compensatory framework should be "restitutionary" in nature and must be paid in addition to the penalty or fine that the polluter is liable to pay. Further, the court said that the liability of the polluter ends only when the damage caused is reversed. The court said that the authorities of the state have a duty to undertake an exercise of valuing the damage caused by the polluter and collect such compensation required for restoration of the environment. While determining this amount, "tangible and intangible damage" by the polluter must be considered. It said that even if actual harm is not caused but is imminent, the liability to pay compensation will be necessary. The amount will further depend on factors such as the financial capacity of the polluter, the cost involved in assessing the damage and loss suffered by individuals and the environment as well as the cost of remediation or restoration. "Any environmental compensation levied must be proportional to the damage caused by the polluter and must have some rational nexus to the pollution caused." the court said, while emphasising the need for courts and tribunals to give reasons while determining environmental compensation. Besides, the court said that parameters such as geographical location of the polluter, the type of entity involved in the act of pollution or non-compliance, any undue advantage gained by the polluter and the health impact such pollution or non-compliance has on the general public will also be kept in mind for determining compensation....