IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2009 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 2124 of 2007(C) ------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. VELAYUDHAN, S/O.PERAPPAN, LAKSHMI MANDIRAM, VENGALAM P.O. KORAPPUZHA VIA, ELATHUR, KOZHIKODE. 2. KALLYANI, W/O.LATE CHANDUKUTTY, THURUTHUMMAL THAZHE VEEDU, P.O.VENGALAM, KORAPPUZHA. 3. SAJITHA.P. W/O.P.SOMAN, SRUTHI NIVAS, VENGALAM P.O. 4. PRADEEP KUMAR.V. S/O.ERY V.M. VELUTHAMANNIL, VENGALAM P.O. 5. V.M.MOHANAND, S/O.RAMOTTY, VILAKKUMADAM VEEDU, VENGALAM P.O. BY ADV. MR.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. CHEMENCHERRY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CHEMENCHERRY, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, KOYILANDY. 3. THE PRESIDENT(JALANIDHI), AMMINISSERI DRINKING WATER SCHEME, KORAPPUZHA. ADV. MR.HARISH R. MENON FOR R1 MR.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR FOR R1 MR.B.G.BHASKAR FOR R.3 MR.BIJU ABRAHAM FOR R.3 MR.M.DINESH, STANDING COUNSEL FOR WATER AUTHORITY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.2124 of 2007 - C --------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioners striving hard for drinking water for years and on finding the steps pursued before the different authorities turned to be futile, have approached this Court pointing out the discriminatory steps being pursued by the authorities, ignoring their genuine demand. It is stated, there is acute scarcity of drinking water in the locality, it being an area with close proximity to the sea and persons who had applied for water connection along with the petitioners and even much thereafter, have been provided with individual connections. 2. It is the case of the petitioners that originally the supply/distribution of drinking water was being pursued by the 2nd respondent/water authority and subsequently, the 1st respondent Grama Panchayath took over the same. The Panchayath had also constituted a Committee, giving shape to a Scheme for providing sufficient drinking water and the beneficiaries were to be members of the Scheme, necessarily effecting the prescribed contributions, which in turn was done by W.P.(C).No.2124 of 2007 - C 2 the petitioners as well. However, the fact remains that petitioners were never provided with the water connection. Though the Panchayath subsequently entrusted the function to the 3rd respondent who took over the same, the said respondent also sought to maintain the same approach and attitude with regard to the grievance of the petitioners, which made them to approach this Court by filing the above writ petition. 3. The 2nd respondent-water authority has filed a counter affidavit stating that they are quite an unnecessary party to the proceedings, particularly since the transfer of the water supply scheme to the Panchayath was effected on 4.12.2002. The 3rd respondent -implementing agency of the Scheme has filed a separate counter affidavit producing copies of the relevant documents showing that they were acting only in tune with the prescribed norms and that the capacity of the project envisaged and implemented was comparatively low, providing only for a total number of 78 connections and hence the capacity is already over. It is stated in paragraph 12 of the said counter affidavit that no further connections could be given as on the date of filing the counter affidavit; that the petitioners were not members of W.P.(C).No.2124 of 2007 - C 3 the concerned Scheme, nor had they remitted any amount towards the cost of the Scheme. It is further stated in paragraph 13 that the petitioners had never submitted any application for connection “to the Society”. 4. The above averment made this Court to pass an interim order on 2.4.2007 directing the petitioners to produce the relevant documents to substantiate their contention that they had already filed necessary application for connection. Pursuant to this, the petitioners have filed a reply affidavit along with Exts.P3 to P9 showing the applications submitted by them, the receipts issued by the Panchayath on payment of the requisite amount and such other relevant facts and figures. From the above, it is clear that the petitioners had submitted application for individual connections directly to the Panchayath and by all means it has to be presumed that the said applications were handed over by the Panchayath to the 3rd respondent when the liability to implement the Scheme was transferred to the 3rd respondent. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that several persons who had submitted applications for individual connection, including persons having lesser seniority when compared with the W.P.(C).No.2124 of 2007 - C 4 date of application submitted by the petitioners, have already been provided with connections and that elimination of the petitioners is nothing but arbitrary, discriminatory and illegal in all respects. The learned counsel further submits that the 1st respondent-Panchayath has very recently launched a “new Scheme” as evidenced from Ext.P9 (Amminissery Drinking Water Project) and that the petitioners might be provided with necessary connection under the said Scheme. 5. The 3rd respondent has conceded that some of the persons seeking for individual water connection as in the instant case, had already approached this Court and pursuant to the orders passed by this Court, connections have been given to them. The stand taken by the 3rd respondent, that the petitioners had not submitted any application before the 3rd respondent to have individual connection, is found not correct or sustainable, as evident from Exts.P3 to P6, showing the filing of necessary application before the Panchayath, also remitting the necessary amount as prescribed for considering their applications. 6. In the above circumstances, the 1st respondent is hereby directed to consider the applications preferred by the W.P.(C).No.2124 of 2007 - C 5 petitioners for providing individual drinking water connections to them, either under Ext.P9 Scheme or otherwise; if any application submitted by anybody else subsequent to the date of filing of applications by the petitioners, has been provided with water connection. The steps in this regard shall be finalised as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioners shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. bkn/-