THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23067 of 2002 ORDER: The petitioners are owners of the land in the ayacut of Raiwada Reservoir near Visakhapatnam. The Reservoir was constructed to cater to the needs of ayacutdars as well as to provide drinking water supply to parts of Visakhapatnam City. With a view to ensure objectivity, the Government of Andhra Pradesh, Irrigation Department, issued G.O.Ms.No.160, dated 22.10.1997, allocating 27.00 M.G.D of water per day to the Municipal Corporation of Visakhapatnam, subject to the condition that in the event of failure of monsoon, the deficit is to be shared by the Corporation as well as the farmers in the same proportion and that in case of emergency, the Corporation will supply water to the Visakhapatnam Steel Plant on the directions of the State Government. The petitioners feel aggrieved by the G.O. According to the petitioners, the Reservoir was not full during the year 2002 and placing reliance upon the G.O., the respondents have not released the water to irrigate Acs.15344 of land under it. The petitioners submit that the G.O. cannot be sustained in law, inasmuch as it places priority on the supply of drinking water sacrificing the interests of farmers. In the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents, it is stated that the project was constructed to serve the dual purpose of irrigating the lands and providing drinking water to Municipal Corporation of Visakhapatnam. It is stated that except on rare occasions, the Reservoir was full and it had served both the purposes without any short supply of water either for irrigation or for drinking. According to the respondents, the G.O. was issued in conformity with the National Water Policy. Heard Sri D.V.Seetharama Murthy, the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Irrigation. It is not in dispute that the Reservoir is meant for supply of water to the agricultural lands in the ayacut as well as to provide drinking water to parts of Municipal Corporation of Visakhapatnam. For the projects of this nature, it is always better that the allocation is defined clearly. Through G.O.Ms.No.160, dated 22.10.1997, the Government allocated 27.00 M.G.D. water to the Corporation. Even this allocation was not absolute or unconditional. A condition is incorporated to the effect that in the event of failure of monsoon, the deficit should be shared by the ayacutdars as well as the Corporation. When the petitioners felt the grievance during the year 2002, this Court passed an interim order and in pursuance thereof, the water supply was released. It is not even alleged that there was any problem for the subsequent years. It needs to be clarified that the interests of the ayacutdars must be protected, even while honouring the commitment to the Corporation. The clause contained in the G.O. that the deficit must be shared by both, must be honoured in letter and spirit. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that the allocation of water in Reservoir, for the ayacutdars on the one hand and the Municipal Corporation of Visakhapatnam on the other shall be on equitable basis without compromising the interest of any one for the other. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:30.12.2008 kdl