SCA/155520/2000 1/5 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 1555 of 2000 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA Sd/- ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? NO 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? NO 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? NO 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? NO 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? NO ========================================================= AMINABEN FAKIRMOHEMMED VADGAMA - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 3 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR KN SARVAIYA FOR MR SHAKEEL A QURESHI for Petitioner(s) : 1, MR HARSHAD PANDYA FOR MR PARESH UPADHYAY for Respondent(s) : 1, 3, RULE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 2, 4, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA Date : 17/12/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1 The petitioner approached the respondent authorities seeking permission to dig and install a bore-well in the field of the petitioner on behalf of SCA/155520/2000 2/5 JUDGMENT 27 persons who had come together to form a Coo- perative Society for the purpose of irrigation. It is the say of the petitioner that the case of the petitioner was recommended by the Minister and other higher authorities despite which the respondent authorities did not grant permission for the bore- well. 2. On behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 3 Affidavit- in-Reply dated 10.12.2008 has been placed on record wherein it is stated that : [i] in relation to the other persons who were granted permission to put-up a bore-well: they are villagers from different villages and some of the applicants had applied prior in point of time namely prior to the application of the petitioner; [ii] the permission for a bore-well is not necessarily required to be granted chronologically, but depending on technical feasibility considering the condition of the site proposed and the possibility of obtaining adequate quantity and suitable quality of ground water. SCA/155520/2000 3/5 JUDGMENT 3. In relation to the quality of water available the following averments are made in the Affidavit-in- Reply : “5. I say that when applications are made for bore-well firstly, necessary survey has to be carried about the possibility of bore- well and if it is found suitable then proposal for drilling bore-well is to be submitted to the Circle Officer. I say that, upon survey and investigation, it was found that the Surendranagar district is severely affected by salinity in ground water due to nature of geological formation. It is stated that, upto 100 m. depth, the ground water is moderately to excessively saline having total dissolved salt (TDS) contents in the range of 2500 to 17000 parts per million (ppm). In grater depths, the ground water again becomes saline due to formational salinity and lack of adequate recharge and therefore, depth of bore-well has to be restricted in the range of 150 to 330 m. depending upon the conditions in different parts of the village/taluka. 6. I say that, after studies and investigation carried out in the Jainabad Village as well as its nearby villagers, it was found that ground water was saline SCA/155520/2000 4/5 JUDGMENT having TDS contents more than the maximum permissible limits. I say that, in November 1998 one site was also selected of Jainabad village and after investigation the it was found non-suitable for drilling any bore-well and therefore, decision was taken by the corporation and same was intimated also to the petitioner on 31.2.2000”. 4. Thus, it is apparent that not only was the petitioner informed on 31.2.2000 that the ground water due to nature of the geological formation is of such a quality that the same cannot be suitable, but the authority has stated that considering the geological condition, the depth of bore-well has to be restricted depending upon conditions in different parts of the villages and the talukas. 5. In the aforesaid circumstances, it is apparent that the petitioner cannot claim as a matter of right that the petitioner must be granted permission to dig and install a bore-well at the site proposed by the petitioner. The petition therefore, does not merit acceptance and is accordingly rejected. Rule discharged. There shall be no order as to costs. SCA/155520/2000 5/5 JUDGMENT Sd/- (D.A.Mehta, J.) M.M.BHATT