“It is easy to issue notices to residents. It is far more difficult to explain why the administration failed to prevent the situation from arising in the first place. Were these homes ever connected to the new sewerage lines? If not, why not? Were there gaps in planning? Was the network left unfinished? Did agencies fail to coordinate? Or did officials simply move on after ribbon cuttings and project announcements while critical last-mile work remained neglected?
Instead, what the public gets is the usual cycle of reactionary governance. Environmental damage occurs. Fish die. Public outrage builds. Courts intervene. Authorities conduct inspections. Notices are issued. Statements are made. Then the system waits for the next crisis.”
Mala Lake Stinks of Institutional
Failure, Not Just Sewage
The stench rising from Mala lake is not just the smell of sewage. It is the smell of institutional failure.
Authorities have identified 31 houses allegedly discharging sewage into drains connected to the lake. Notices have been issued, inspections ordered, and the familiar machinery of civic enforcement has swung into motion. But the attempt to frame this crisis as the wrongdoing of a few households is both convenient and dishonest.
The real scandal is far bigger.
Panaji was showcased as part of India’s ambitious Smart City Mission, a project sold to the public as a transformation of urban life through modern infrastructure, scientific planning, and sustainable development. Roads were dug up for years. Citizens endured endless diversions, dust, delays, and disruption in the name of progress. Thousands of crores were spent on redevelopment works, sewerage systems, drainage upgrades, and urban renewal.
So the obvious question now is this: after all that money and all those promises, how are homes still dumping sewage into a lake in the middle of the capital city?
This is not merely a failure of compliance by residents. It is a collapse of governance.
A functioning sewerage system is not optional infrastructure in a modern city. It is one of the most basic responsibilities of urban administration. If dozens of houses around a sensitive water body remain outside the network, then the project itself stands exposed. Either the infrastructure was incomplete, the execution was flawed, or the authorities simply failed to ensure universal connectivity.
In every scenario, accountability points upward.
It is easy to issue notices to residents. It is far more difficult to explain why the administration failed to prevent the situation from arising in the first place. Were these homes ever connected to the new sewerage lines? If not, why not? Were there gaps in planning? Was the network left unfinished? Did agencies fail to coordinate? Or did officials simply move on after ribbon cuttings and project announcements while critical last-mile work remained neglected?
These are the questions that deserve answers.
Instead, what the public gets is the usual cycle of reactionary governance. Environmental damage occurs. Fish die. Public outrage builds. Courts intervene. Authorities conduct inspections. Notices are issued. Statements are made. Then the system waits for the next crisis.
This is not governance. It is damage control.
The Mala lake episode also reveals the hollow nature of much of what passes for “smart” urban development today. Cities are being redesigned for appearances rather than functionality. Beautification takes priority over fundamentals. Decorative infrastructure receives attention while underground systems that actually determine public health and environmental sustainability remain broken, incomplete, or poorly monitored.
A city does not become smart because it installs fancy streetlights, colourful pavements, or redesigned junctions. A city becomes smart when sewage does not enter its lakes.
