Row Over Meters For Water Taps In Rural Areas

The decision to introduce water meters for rural household connections and levy consumption-based charges under GO-Ms-160 has raised concerns about an additional financial burden on villagers, particularly ahead of the local body elections.

The guidelines, linked to the Centre’s Jal Jeevan Mission, seek to shift rural water supply towards a utility-based management model. The framework envisages metering the household connections, collecting charges according to consumption and increasing community participation in maintaining the water infrastructure even in rural parts.

The stated objective is to meet recurring costs related to electricity bills, pump repairs, pipeline maintenance and water quality testing. While sustainable maintenance is essential, a crucial question remains: Should access to drinking water depend on a household’s ability to pay?

However, social organisations and activists oppose the plan to set up meters in rural areas stating that water is a fundamental right.

Cancer patients, people undergoing dialysis and those suffering from waterborne illnesses need reliable access to safe water. For families already struggling with medical expenses, additional water charges can deepen financial hardship, it is averred.

Activists say, “A policy that treats drinking water primarily as a billable commodity risks undermining the principle that essential public services must remain accessible to all.”

Financial Burden:

The proposed financial arrangements raise concern about the burden placed on rural local bodies. Under the reported framework, Gram Panchayats in hilly areas and areas where SC /ST populations together exceed 50 per cent are required to contribute 5 per cent, while the other panchayats 10 per cent.

Many Gram Panchayats already struggle to fund sanitation, drainage, roads, street lighting and other basic services. Additional financial obligations without adequate and predictable government assistance could weaken their ability to meet these responsibilities.

The government, they say, must clarify the basis for these contribution rates, the expected sources of funding and the safeguards available to financially disadvantaged villages. Decentralisation should strengthen local governance, not transfer unfunded responsibilities to institutions with limited resources.

Fluoride-affected regions:
“The proposal is particularly objectionable for areas where access to safe drinking water is already difficult. Parts of AP, including areas in Anantapur district and the regions around Markapuram and Ongole, have faced challenges involving water quality, groundwater availability and reliable supply,” stated AP Praja Science Vedika president Suresh Babu.

In fluoride-affected areas, the primary concern is not simply how much water households consume, but whether the water supplied is safe. Where contamination, irregular supply or inadequate infrastructure persists, imposing charges without ensuring quality and reliability would place an unfair burden on residents, it is noted.

Suresh Babu noted that communities in A Konduru and Uddanam, where serious health concerns and the need for dialysis care have been widely reported, also require particular attention.

It is proposed that the government should strengthen public investment, repair leaking pipelines, improve water quality monitoring and provide adequate funds to Gram Panchayats. Community participation must mean shared responsibility and democratic accountability, not simply transferring costs to rural households. Water is not a luxury to be purchased according to one’s ability to pay, Suresh Babu stressed.