IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2011 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 837 of 2011(D) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ ZUBAIDA.V.K, W/O. ABDUL GAFOOR, AGED 45 YEARS, GRACIOUS HOUSE, MUTHUVALLUR.P.O, NEERAD. KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.SAMSUDIN RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. KONDOTTY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 673 638. 2. THE SECRETARY, KONDOTTY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 673 638. 3. HAROON MOHAMMED.P, THE CONVENOR, NEERAD AM LP SCHOOL DRINKING WATER PROJECT, MUTHUVALUR.P.O, NEERAD, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 678 638. * ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 4 TO 6 SOUGH TO BE IMPLEADED:- 4. T.MUHAMMED, S/O.ABDURAHIMAN, AGED 55 YEARS, NELLIKUNNU VEEDU, MUTHUVALLOOR P.O., NEERAD, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DT. 5. P.ABOOBACKER, S/O. MAMAD HAJI, CHERUTHODI HOUSE, MUTHAVALLOOR P.O., NEERAD, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DT. 6. P.P.ABDUL MAJEED, S/O. MAMMOOTTY MASTER, MANAGER, A.M.L.P SCHOOL, NEERAD, MUTHUVALLOOR P.O., NEERAD, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DT. * ( ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 4 TO 6 ARE SOUGHT TO BE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 10.02.2011 IN I.A NO. 2408/2011.) ...2/- WP(C).No. 837 of 2011(D) --2-- R1 & R2 BY ADV.SRI.P.VENUGOPAL (1086/92) R3 BY ADVS.SRI.K.JAJU BABU SRI.U.K.DEVIDAS ADDL R4 TO R6 BY ADVS.SRI.R.SUDHISH SMT.M.MANJU SRI.K.R.RANJITH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 837 of 2011(D) A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE RECEIPT FOR PAYMENT OF RS.1,500/- DATED 01.11.2010. EXT.P2:- PHOTO SHOWING THE DISCONNECTED WATER PIPE. EXT.P3:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT.01-12-2010. EXT.P4:- COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 08-12-2010 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4:- COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DT. 14-01-2011. EXT.P5:- COPY OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE GRAMA SABHA DT. 14-01-2011. EXT.P6:- COPY OF THE RESOLUTION DT.17-01-2011 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.R1(A):-COPY OF THE LETTER/EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT ON 15-12-2010. EXT.R1(B):-COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 30-12-2010. EXT.R1(C):-COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR DATED 10-01-2011. EXT.R1(D):-COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18-01-2011 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.R3(A):- COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT.R3(B):- COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE WELL OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.R3(C):-COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT TO THE ONE OF ITS BENEFICIARY. EXT.R3(D):- COPY OF THE MINUTES BOOK OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT COMMITTEE. EXT.R3(E):-COPY OF THE CRIMINAL COMPLAINT FILED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MALAPPURAM WITH RECEIPT. EXT.R3(F):-COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED NIL FILED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.R3(G):-COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE FIRST REPONDENT. WP(C).No. 837 of 2011(D) EXT.R3(H):-COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 04-02-2011 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE THIRD THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT.R4(A):-COPY OF THE RECEIPTS ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS. EXT.R4(B):-COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE MINUTES BOOKS OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.R4(C):-COPY OF THE PAPER REPORT IN THE MADHYAMAN DAILY DATED 09-02-2011. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C) No. 837 of 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 31st day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T This writ petition has been filed mainly with the prayer to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the 2nd respondent to restore water supply, under the 'Neerad AMLP School Drinking Water Project', to the house of the petitioner without any further delay and at the earliest. The main contention of the petitioner is that the 'Neerad AMLP School Drinking Water Project' is a project under the auspices of the Kondotty Grama Panchayat and that the family of the petitioner is a beneficiary of the project. It is further contended that he had paid an amount of Rs.1,500/- for water connection from the project and on being granted the connection, he used to pay water charge of Rs.50/- regularly. According to the petitioner, on account of personal animosity the 3rd respondent and his henchmen cut off the water pipe drawn to the petitioner's house. Thereupon, based on Ext.P3 complaint of the petitioner, the 2nd respondent issued Ext.P4 show cause notice to the 3rd respondent and then, left the matter there. It is in the said circumstances, that this writ petitioner has been filed mainly with the above prayer. W.P.(C) No. 837 of 2011(D) - 2 - 2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 and a separate counter affidavit has been filed by the 3rd respondent. Respondents 4 to 6 are persons who have applied for water connection in the year 2005 and still waiting for water connection. They refuted the contention of the petitioner that the water project namely, 'Neerad AMLP School Drinking Water Project' is a project under Kondotty Grama Panchayat. In the counter affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent, it is stated that the Society is registered under the Societies Registration Act XXI of 1860 and it is formed for the running of 'Swajal Dhara Drinking Water Supply Project' introduced by the Government of India. Exhibit R3(a) is the registration certificate. It is further stated thereunder that the Society has started giving water supply connections to the beneficiaries on 24.5.2010 onwards and, so far, 35 water connections have been provided to the beneficiaries, on payment of Rs.1,500/- as connection charge. The consumers have to pay a monthly water charge of Rs.50/-. Later, the connection charge was enhanced to Rs.3,000/-. Now, five applications for water connection are pending consideration before the Society. According to the 3rd respondent, Exhibit P1 is a forged document. At no point of time receipt like Ext.P1 has been issued by the W.P.(C) No. 837 of 2011(D) - 3 - Society and it is a document forged following the receipt pattern of the Kerala Water Authority. A specimen receipt of the Society has been produced along with the counter affidavit as Exhibit R3(c). That apart, it is specifically stated therein that on receipt of applications from the beneficiaries, it would be recorded in the minutes of the Committee and the name of the petitioner has not been recorded anywhere in the minutes book. The definite case of the 3rd respondent is that the petitioner has not submitted any application for water connection under the project and that it is absolutely incorrect to say that the petitioner had remitted connection charge and used to pay regularly the usage charge of Rs.50/- per month. As already noted, according to the 3rd respondent has forged Ext.P1 receipt and they have not issued the same to the petitioner. According to the 3rd respondent, the attempt of the petitioner is to get water connection without making application and payment. In case, the petitioner desires to get water connection he has to resort to the recognised procedures and also to comply with the conditions, it is submitted. 3. A scanning of the contentions of the petitioner in this writ petition would reveal that the petitioner do not have a case that he is a member of the Society that runs Neerad AMLP School Drinking W.P.(C) No. 837 of 2011(D) - 4 - Water Project. In fact, the petitioner got no material to show that he is a member of the Society. So also he has not produced any reliable material to show that he had submitted an application for water connection and paid the beneficiary contributions, in accordance with the scheme in question. True that the petitioner has produced Ext.P1 to fortify his contention that he had remitted the connection charge and water charge on 01.11.2010. As already noticed, the 3rd respondent refuted the same and produced Ext.R3 (c) as a specimen to show and contend that Ext.P1 is not one issued by the Society and it is a forged one. In the said context, it is also relevant to look into Exts.R4(a) and R4(b). Ext.R4(a) is the true copies of the receipts issued to respondents 4 to 6 when they applied for water connection, under the project, in the year 2005. A bare perusal of Ext.R4(a) receipts and Ext.R3(c) would resemble each other in all respects. There is no dispute with respect to the fact the respondents 4 to 6 made their applications for water connection in the year 2005 and are still waiting for the connection. Ext.P4(a) would reveal that they remitted the beneficiary contribution amount of Rs.1,500/- in the year 2005. Going by the contention of the petitioner he remitted the connection charge viz., beneficiary contribution amount only along with the bill for the W.P.(C) No. 837 of 2011(D) - 5 - month of October, 2010. I do not think that this Court should go into that issue any further, in view of the relief sought for in this writ petition and in view of the rival contentions and the factual position obtained in this case. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks for a direction to the 2nd respondent to restore the water connection. Admittedly, respondents 1 and 2 have no role in the matter of granting of water connection under the Neerad AMLP School Drinking Water Project. Obviously, applicants like respondents 4 to 6 are still waiting in queue for getting water connection under the project even after remitting the beneficiary contribution of Rs.1,500/-, in the year 2005. There is absolutely no averment in the writ petition that the petitioner had submitted an application and remitted the beneficiary contribution amount or charge for granting water connection under the project earlier than respondents 4 to 6. In a scheme for water connection like the present one, under such circumstances, it will not be appropriate to direct the concerned respondents to grant water connection ignoring the priority and the procedures. In that view of the matter and also in the absence of any material to show that after consideration of the application by the petitioner and on complying with all the requisite procedures the W.P.(C) No. 837 of 2011(D) - 6 - petitioner was granted water connection under the Scheme, the petitioner is not entitled to the relief sought for in this writ petition. This writ petition is liable to fail. Accordingly, it is dismissed. It is made clear that dismissal of the writ petition will not stand in the way of the petitioner to get water connection under the Neerad AMLP School Drinking Water Project, on complying with the conditions and procedures, in accordance with the scheme, after remitting the beneficiary contribution. C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE KRK