THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.26188 of 2003 Dated:02.12.2010 Between: Chintapalli Yesuratnam, And others. ...Petitioners And The Mandal Revenue Officer, Phirangipuram Mandal, Guntur District, And others. ...Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO WRIT PETITION No.26188 of 2003 ORDER: The three petitioners are aggrieved by the action of the respondents in proposing to convert Vuracheruvu into drinking water tank. They filed the instant writ petition for declaration and direction. It is the case of the petitioners that there are 45 small and marginal farmers in Yerraguntlapadu Village of Phirangipuram Mandal in Guntur District drawing water through underground pipelines from Vuracheruvu. They also allege that the first respondent sanctioned the scheme on 21.05.1993 enabling the ryots to draw the water for their lands. In 1998 the first respondent issued house site pattas in survey Nos.76, 92, 93, 100, 101, 102, 103 and 107. Though there are four water bodies/tanks within Yerraguntlapadu Village, namely, Vuracheruvu (Acs.11.34 cents), Abbanagunta (Acs.20.00), Narayanacheruvu (Acs.7.00) and Angadharu (Acs.20.00), the respondents so as to deprive the petitioners of irrigation water, are proposing to convert Vuracheruvu into drinking water tank under a water project. The writ petition was admitted on 17.12.2003. The petitioners filed W.P.M.P.No.33086 of 2003 for stay of conversion into water storage tank. This Court passed orders on 16.03.2004 observing that no Ayacut is recorded under Vuracheruvu and that it is for the authorities to take decision with regard to feasibility of conversion of the tank. The said interim order was passed after the Mandal Revenue Officer – first respondent herein, filed a counter affidavit. In the counter affidavit while making reference to Narmada Bachao Andolan v Union of India[1] and Hinchlal Tiwari v Kamala Devi[2] it is stated that it is the duty of the State to protect all water bodies in the interest of ecology. This Court heard the Counsel for the petitioners and the Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue. It is well settled that drinking is the most beneficial use of water (see Delhi Water Supply & Sewage Disposal Undertaking v State of Haryana[3]). Any scheme for the use of water for irrigation ignoring its use for drinking cannot be constitutionally sustained. A reference may be made to Rajakajana Seva Sangham, Medikonduru, Guntur District v Revenue Divisional Officer, Guntur[4] wherein it was held. Be it noted that as observed by the Supreme Court in Delhi Water Supply & Sewage Disposal Undertaking v. State of Haryana (AIR 1996 SC 2992 = 1996 (2) ALD (SCSN) 24), drinking is the most beneficial use of water and such beneficial use for drinking of water cannot be made subservient to any other use of water like irrigation as the use of water for drinking prevails over other needs. In this case, the conflict of rights is between the washermen for the purpose of washing clothes and the villagers for the purpose of drinking. The law gives precedence to the right of the latter and therefore, the petitioner-sangham cannot enforce any right much less a non- existing right to claim entire Ademma tank for the purpose of washing clothes. The fact that the impugned proceedings dated 21-02-2004 allows an extent of Acs.2.11 cents exclusively for washing purposes cannot be ignored while considering the question of rationality or arbitrariness. The right to drinking water is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Further, it is for the executive branch of the State to decide on policy as to whether a water body should be used as irrigation tank or drinking water storage tank. The Court of judicial review cannot claim any expertise in these matters, especially, when the petitioners have not attributed any mala fides. The writ petition is misconceived, and the same is accordingly dismissed with costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 02.12.2010 vs [1] (2000) 10 SCC 664 [2] (2001) 6 SCC 496 = AIR 2001 SC 3215 [3] AIR 1996 SC 2992 = 1996 (2) ALD (SCSN) 24 [4] 2006 (5) ALD 512