IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition P.I.L. No. 72 of 2011 Mohan Chandra Dani. ………. Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand & another. ..………. Respondents Mr. Rahul Consul, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.P. Joshi, Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand / respondents. JUDGMENT Coram: Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, C.J. Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. BARIN GHOSH, C. J. (Oral) There appears to be no public interest in the present writ petition. Petitioners are getting supply of irrigation water from a tube well installed by the Irrigation Department at a distance of about 2 kms. from the villages Sunderpur Belwal and Banskhera East. The purpose of the present writ petition is to obtain water from a tube well of the Irrigation Department installed at village Lakhanpur. In the body of the petition, it has been stated that the Gram Pradhan of village Lakhanpur is averse to supply of water from the tube well installed at village Lakhanpur to villages Sunderpur Belwal and Banskhera East. The Gram Pradhan of village Lakhanpur is not a party to the present writ petition. It appears that it is not the allegation in the writ petition that there is scarcity of water from the source now available. The contention is this that, in the event, water is made available from the tube well at village Lakhanpur, the cost of obtaining irrigation water for villages of Sunderpur Belwal and Banskhera East will be reduced. 2. We think, for such a purpose, recourse to public interest litigation should not be taken and, accordingly, we dismiss the writ petition. (V.K. Bist, J.) (Barin Ghosh, C. J.) 29.08.2011 29.08.2011 G