By M. M. Janapriya –

Dr M. M. Janapriya

In the nice wide and leafy lane of Mount Lavinia, called the station road with blocked drains and ruggedness collecting rain and other waters, nestled within the jurisdiction of the Dehiwala-Mount Lavinia Municipal Council (DMMC), a quiet but consequential battle is unfolding. It is not about politics or privilege, but about pet waste, public health, and the erosion of civic responsibility.

For over half a century, for nearly seven decades to be accurate, the house at 5/1 Lilian Avenue has stood as a testament to generational continuity and municipal cooperation. But today, its residents, led by a retired Specialist Surgeon and a public health advocate, find themselves stonewalled by the very institution meant to safeguard their wellbeing.

The issue? Refuse collectors have declined to collect securely packed pet waste, despite it being sealed in leakproof bags and placed alongside regular household refuse. The reason? A retaliatory boycott following the family’s refusal to pay an unofficial “holiday tip” a practice that reeks more of extortion than tradition. Mind you, for over 2 years since we returned to this house after refurbishment the council fulfilled its duties to our fullest satisfaction including pet waste disposal.

This isn’t just a domestic inconvenience. It’s a public health hazard. The household includes two dogs, both suffering from small bowel malabsorption, (one with a deformed hind leg too) whose waste is responsibly managed by the family. Yet for over three months now, the DMMC has turned a blind eye. Worse still, local authority inspectors who visited the premises appeared to anticipate that the family would leave the sealed bags to rot by the roadside, an act they could then weaponize as grounds for legal action under public nuisance laws. But the family’s daughter, a Registrar in Community Medicine, refused to fall into that trap. Instead, she allowed the bags to accumulate in her back garden, shielding the public from immediate exposure but creating a growing health risk to herself and no other.

The legal landscape is clear. The Municipal Council Ordinance No. 19 of 1987 mandates councils to regulate and administer all matters relating to public health, including the timely removal of household refuse. The Constitution of Sri Lanka, under Section 156(1)(a) and Schedule 5, assigns this duty unequivocally to local government. No statute, by-law, or bureaucratic whim can override this constitutional obligation.

Yet when the family reached out, first through a detailed letter from  the family’s daughter, a Community Medicine doctor herself, and later via a follow-up email from her father, Dr. M.M. Janapriya, a senior surgeon, the response was silence. Not even an acknowledgement. A phone call to the Mayor yielded a dismissive retort: “If you rear dogs, it’s your responsibility to get rid of their night soil too. You can go to court if you want”

This cavalier attitude is not just legally indefensible, it is morally bankrupt. In countries that aspire to be “rich” and offer “beautiful lives,” as our government slogan proclaims, metal pet waste boxes are placed atop wooden or cement pillars at regular intervals on the wayside from which the waste is collected by municipal authorities periodically. Here, the refusal to collect properly packed pet waste not only violates statutory duty but undermines the dignity of caregivers, the elderly, and families with young children who rely on disposable hygiene products.

The family’s story is not unique. Across Sri Lanka, residents face similar harassment, forced to choose between illegal dumping and unsanitary accumulation. If we are to build a “Clean Sri Lanka,” we must stop asking “who dumped the waste?” and start asking “why did they have to?”

This is a call for urgent reform. For accountability. For a municipal culture that respects its legal mandate and the people it serves. The DMMC must act, not just to remove the waste, but to restore public trust.

Until then, the stench of neglect will linger, not just on the roadside, but in the conscience of our civic institutions.