IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 15TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 10308 of 2008(B) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- KAPPACHERI NARAYAN ,S/O. KANNAN, AGED 70 YEARS,RESIDING AT MULLOOL,KAPPTUVAM P.O., TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.SURENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------- 1. CHAIRMAN OF KERALA WATER AUTHORITY &SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001 2. MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY HEAD OFFICE JALA BHAVAN, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695033 3. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, WATER RESOURCES DEPATMENT,SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001 4. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR,JBIC PROJECTS KERALA WATER AUTHORITY,THANA,KANNUR KANNUR DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.BABU VARGHESE, SC, KWA FOR R2,4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.10308/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICICATE DT 17.1.2008 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE SECRETARY, PATTUVAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE PLAN OF PATTUVAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT SHOWING THE ALIGNMENT OF THE PROPOSED PIPELINES TO BE DRAWN IN PATTUVAM VILLAGE. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT 22.4.2007 MADE TO THE HON'BLE MINISTER BY THE PETITIONER AND THE OTHER RESIDENTS OF the LOCALITY. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT 5.5.2007 ISSUED BY THE PRIVATE SECRETARY OF THE HON'BLE MINISTER. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE INSPECTION REPORT AND ESTIMATE FORWARDED BY THE CONSULTANCY COMPANY TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE COLLECTORATE MARCH. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============== W.P.(C) NO. 10308 OF 2008 (B) ==================== Dated this the 4th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is an elected representative from Ward No.9 of Pattuvam Grama Panchayat. According to the petitioner, Ward No.9 comprises of the areas known as Mullool, Koothattu and Kavin Munambu in Pattuvam Village. The area is surrounded by saline river water on three sides, it being a coastal area and the wells in the area contain only saline water. 2. Ext.P1 certificate issued by the Secretary of the Panchayat shows that the total population of the Ward is 1200 as per the latest census. The water supply scheme to Pattuvam and adjoining villages, commonly known as Pattuvam Scheme, is a scheme framed by the 3rd respondent under the Kerala Water Supply Project for providing drinking water to the public residing in the Pattuvam Grama Panchayat and adjoining villages. The scheme is intended to provide drinking water in the nearby villages and also Taliparamba Municipality by using funds from the ODA loan of Overseas Economic Co-operation Fund of Japan. 3. The proposed distribution network comprises of a total 623 KM pipeline. According to the petitioner, even though Ward No. 9 was originally included in Phase-1 of the scheme, subsequently due to political WPC 10308/08 :2 : influence and interference of the ruling coalition, the Ward was excluded from the implementation of the Pattuvam Scheme. Petitioner states that the voters of the Ward did not support the LDF candidate in the last several elections and therefore the LDF leadership wanted the residents to suffer. 4. Ext.P2 is a sketch of Pattuvam Grama Panchayat area prepared by the petitioner and a perusal of Ext.P2 shows that except Ward No.9, all the remaining 11 Wards of the Panchayat are covered by the Pattuvam scheme. The genuineness of the sketch is not in dispute. According to the petitioner, Ext.P3 mass petition was filed complaining of the exclusion of Ward No.9. That was forwarded to the 3rd respondent, leading to Ext.P5, which is a report prepared by the consultant appointed by the 3rd respondent. Ext.P5 report shows that if water supply is to be provided to Ward No.9, an additional length of 3.3 km pipe line will have to be laid. The estimate attached to Ext.P5 shows the cost involved is around Rs.7,70,932/-. Petitioner submits that inspite of all this, nothing fruitful has been done and the work of the scheme, excluding Ward No.9 is progressing. It is stated that right to be supplied drinking water is a fundamental right guaranteed to every citizen of this country and by excluding Ward No.9 in the Pattuvam scheme, the fundamental rights of the residents of Ward No.9 for a meaningful life is WPC 10308/08 :3 : grossly violated. 5. Respondents 2 and 4 has filed a counter affidavit. According to the respondents, although the initial scheme cover a distance of 1100 kms, the project had to be restricted to 623 kms and the reason stated is financial constraints. It is stated that Ward No.9 is not excluded from the scheme, but implementation in the Ward is only deferred for Phase-2. The Water Authority also does not dispute the need for water supply in the area. Thus, it is basically financial constraints which is urged by the Water Authority for excluding Ward No.9 of the Pattuvam Panchayat from the Water Supply Scheme. 6. I have heard the counsel for the petitioner and also the counsel for the respondents. 7. In my view, the contention of the petitioner that Ward No.9 of the Panchayat alone is excluded from water supply scheme deserves to be accepted in view of Ext.P2 sketch produced by the petitioner. This averment also is not disputed in the counter affidavit filed. The technical feasibility of laying the pipes is also supported by Ext.P5 report prepared by the consultant appointed by the 3rd respondent. In these circumstances, the question is whether the so called financial constraints alone could justify exclusion of WPC 10308/08 :4 : Ward No.9 alone from the Water Supply Scheme, is to be answered. 8. While appreciating the contentions of the Water Authority in this behalf, I must bear in mind the undisputed averments in the writ petition that the area is surrounded by saline water and that the river and wells in the area contain only saline water, it being a coastal area. 9. It cannot be disputed that the right for supply of drinking water is a right flowing from Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is the right of every citizen to lead a meaningful life and not a life of animal existence. There is also a corresponding duty for the State to provide necessary facilities so that the citizens life, is one with atleast minimum facilities, such as supply of drinking water. Thus what needs to be examined is whether the fundamental right to be supplied drinking water can be denied or delayed or avoided on the only ground of financial constraints. When the Water Authority is executing a project covering 623 kms and that too over all other Wards of the Panchayat except Ward No.9, I am inclined to think that the respondents should not be allowed to exclude this area alone, where admittedly there is dire necessity for water supply, for the only reason that there is financial constraints. As against the massive project that is implemented, since the cost estimated is only Rs.7.7 lakhs, I am inclined to think that the Water Authority WPC 10308/08 :5 : should take up this project as well and implement the same as it is for the public good. 10. Therefore, I direct the respondents to include Ward No.9 of Pattuvam Grama Panchayat in Phase-1 of the Pattuvam Scheme and ensure drinking water supply in that area also. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp