1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA P.I.L. Writ Petition No. 444 of 2004 Paresh Shetgaonkar, Advocate Indian national, aged 27 years, Resident of MMC/87,88 Head Land Sada Mormugao Goa – 403 804. ... Petitioner V e r s u s 1. Chairman, Board of Trustees of the Port Mormugao (Registered Address for service) Administrative office, Head Land Sada Mormugao Goa 2. Assistant Engineer, PHE Division Public Works Division, Baina, Mormugao Goa 3. Chief Engineer, Irrigation Department, Water Resources Division Junta house, Panaji Goa 4. State of Goa through its Chief Secretary having office at Secretariat Building Panaji Goa ... Respondents 2 Shri Ryan Menezes, Amicus Curiae. Shri Guru Shirodkar, Government Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 to 4. None present on behalf of the other Respondents. Coram: S. B. DESHMUKH & F.M. REIS, JJ. Date: 31 st January, 2011. ORAL JUDGMENT (per F.M. Reis J.): The above petition is filed praying, inter-alia, for a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction or order commanding respondent no. 1 to stop operating and using of electric motor pump within radius of 30 metres of the said public hand pump and also an appropriate writ or direction to respondent no. 2 to 4 to act and repair all existing bore wells urgently, considering the situation of water shortage and further directions to respondent nos. 2 to 4 to conduct the hydrological survey considering the urgency and to make arrangement to supply 3 water. It is also prayed by the petitioner to command respondent nos. 2 to 4 to take immediate steps for repairing hand pumps/bore wells to ensure regular and continuous water supply at Headland Sada. 2. On perusal of the petition we find it is filed essentially on the ground that the petitioner who is a resident of Headland Sada by birth situated in Mormugao Taluka, South Goa has been facing problem of acute shortage of water. The residents from Head Land Sada had to travel 2 kms. in search of water down to the sea level. It is further the contention of the petitioner that respondent no. 2 drilled several bore wells and installed hand pumps to provide drinking water to the inhabitants. It is further contended that respondent no. 1 decided to construct a hospital and as such drilled a bore well in the vicinity of the said hospital and thereafter drilled another bore well parallel to the existing public hand pump and the water of the said pump was used for the purpose of construction of the hospital. It is further the 4 case that the local residents visited the construction site and expressed their problem of acute water shortage as a result of extensive extraction of water by respondent no. 1. 3. Respondent no. 1 filed affidavit in reply and stated that for the construction of the hospital, the bore well was dug in June, 2001 by the said respondent for the said purpose. It is further stated that the bore well is constructed away from the public hand pump within a radius of 30 metres and is operated by an electric pump. It is further contented that all the major works of the hospital are completed and bore well is being used in case of emergency and that water supply is very much essential for the hospital and for that bore well is used in case of emergency. 4. In affidavit in reply, filed by the Executive Engineer, PWD, Work Division IX, Margao he has stated that prior to year 1989 there was inadequate water in Vasco, as well as in Headland Sada as, water supply system was operating 5 from Opa water supply work. He has further stated that from the year 1989-90, Selaulim water supply scheme was commissioned and as such Vasco including Headland Sada was connected to the said scheme which was fully satisfied the water requirements of the said area. 5. It is further stated that in July, 1999, land slide occurred at Tariwadda, Sada which disrupted 600 mm dia. Pre-stressed concrete conveying main water supply to Sada and that water supply was re-stored by interconnection of Selaulim line to old Opa conveying main water system by lesser dia. pipeline i.e. 300 mm dia, as old Opa line was also 300 mm dia. It is further stated that due to low capacity of conveying storage capacity of the Midland Sada and low capacity of rising water supply at Sada runs on critical conditions and also frequent power failure, worsening the situation even more. He further states that as there is no scope for improvement the following schemes are proposed to augment water supply to Headland Sada namely: 6 i. Shifting of 600 mm dia P.S.C. conveying main water from Tariwada to Headland Sada by 600 mm dia. from 15,700 kms. to 17,680 kms. ii. Improvement of water supply to Mormugao constituency, phase-I. iii.Improvement of water supply scheme to Mormugao constituency, phase-I. Construction of 3000 cum M.B.R. 650 cum. OHR, pump house and pump installations. iv. Augmentation of Selaulim water supply scheme and v. Interlinking of four rivers to improve water supply schemes. He further states that water supply to Sada area is scarce and that after obtaining inspection report from bore well expert, quotations were invited from the agency for drilling the bore wells and also for repairing of various bore wells. 6. By order passed by this Court, dated 12-08-2009, the Executive Engineer, WD IX, PWD, Margao, Goa was directed to file an affidavit to clarify as to whether the 7 proposed scheme mentioned in para 9(a) to (e) have been executed. On 09-09-2010, the petitioner remained absent and as such Shri S.D. Padiyar was appointed as Amicus Curiae to proceed with the matter as it was a Public Interest Litigation. Subsequently, on 30-09-2010, in view of the statement on behalf of Advocate Shri Padiyar that he is unable to handle the matter for personal reasons, Shri Ryan Menezes was appointed as Amicus Curiae to conduct the case of the petitioner. 7. We have heard learned Counsel Shri Ryan Menezes, Amicus Curiae for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate Shri Guru Shirodkar for respondent nos. 2 to 4. With the assistance of the learned Counsel, we have perused the affidavit filed by the Executive Engineer pursuant to the said order passed on 12-08-2009. The affidavit states at paras (3),(4),(5),(6) and (7) thus: “3. I say that Scheme under clause (c) is already prepared and submitted to the Government for approval. I say that this 8 Scheme is for the supply of water to the Mormugao Constituency and likely to be completed by the end of the year 2012. 4. I say that as far as scheme under clause (d), the Memorandum of Understanding has been signed by the Government with JIAKA (Japan Bank). This is the project for South Goa. The preparation of estimate is at preliminary stage and the work is likely to be completed at the end of the year 2013. 5. I say that scheme under clause (e) is interlinking the four rivers is within the jurisdiction of Water Resource Department and that right now I am not aware of the status of the said Scheme. 6. I say that apart from above referred Schemes as stated in para 9 of Affidavit-in- Reply, the P.W.D. Department completed the work of replacing PSC water pipeline by MS pipeline from Xelpem to Margao and installed two high capacity pumps along with two filter beds at Selaulim. I say 9 that due to completion of this additional work of Headland Sada is not only benefited but currently an average 3 to 4 hours daily water is supplied to Headland Sada which is double that of supplied in the year 2005. 7. I say that on completion of schemes under clause (c) and (d) of the para 9, steady water supply will be done to the Headland Sada area as well as whole of South Goa.” 8. Shri Ryan Menezes, Amicus Curiae appearing for the petitioner, pointed out that though some initiative is taken by respondent nos. 2 to 4 to augment supply of water to the said area, there should be a permanent solution to ensure that the residents of said area are not deprived of the requirement of water. Shri Ryan Menezes, Amicus Curiae further submits that in view of the said affidavit filed by the Executive Engineer stating, inter-alia, that the scheme initiated by the Government would be completed within specific period, it would be appropriate that respondent nos. 2 to 4 be directed to 10 complete the said scheme within the time stipulated in the said paras 3 and 4 of the affidavit filed by the Executive Engineer. Shri Guru Shirodkar learned Government Advocate, states that all the measures are taken to ensure that the schemes are completed within the stipulated period stated therein. 9. Shri Ryan Menezes, Amicus Curiae further states that there are some hindrances occasionally to the residents of Sada as regards to water shortage in the locality. He further submits that liberty should be given to the residents of said locality including the petitioner, to approach the concerned authority with any such grievance so that the same can be attended to and some remedial measures are taken at the earliest. 10. On hearing the learned Counsel, we find that there are no specific grievances brought to our notice by the petitioner with regard to the hindrance in the supply of water to Headland Sada area. But in case of any such hindrance, it 11 would be appropriate that petitioner and/or any other resident of the said locality can put forward a representation to respondent no. 2 who shall take necessary action and take remedial measures within a reasonable time. We would like to place on record, a word of appreciation for the assistance of Amicus Curiae in assisting us to dispose the above petition. 11. In view of the above, we find that the petition can be disposed of by directing respondent nos. 2 to 4 to ensure that the scheme referred to at paras 3 and 4 of the said affidavit are completed within the period stipulated therein. 12. The petitioner and/or any other resident of the locality of Headland Sada are at liberty to make a representation to respondent no. 2 with regard to any hindrance in connection with supply of water in the said area and in case of any such representation, respondent no. 2 shall consider and take remedial measures, within a reasonable time. 12 13. The petition is disposed, with no order as to costs. Rule made absolute in above terms. S. B. DESHMUKH, J. F. M. REIS, J. Ev