IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1807 of 2011 UPENDRA NARAYAN KAMAT Son of late Subodh Narayan Kamat, resident of village + P.O. Suriyahi, Via Phulparas, District Madhubani … … Petitioner Versus 1. The Union of India through the Cabinet Secretary, Government of India, New Delhi 2. The Cabinet Secretary, Government of India, New Delhi, 3. The Secretary, Water Resources Department, Union of India, New Delhi, 4. The National Disaster Management Authority through its Chairperson, Government of India, New Delhi, 5. The Chairperson, National Disaster Management Authority, Government of India, New Delhi, 6. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna, 7. The Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna, 8. The Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, 9. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, 10. The Executive Engineer, Flood Control Division, No. 1, Jhanjharpur, District Madhubani, 11. The District Magistrate, Madhubani, 12. The State Disaster Management Authority through its Chairperson, Government of Bihar, Patna, 13. The Chairperson, State Disaster Management Authority, Government of Bihar, Patna, ----------- 2 28.01.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Union of India. Petitioner is a resident of village Suriyahi in the District of Madhubani. He has preferred this Public Interest Litigation on the basis of a report/letter of Circle Officer, 2 Phulparas dated 12.08.2009 addressed to the District Magistrate, Madhubani. At that time, the village was affected by the flood and misery of the villagers has been mentioned in detail in that letter. In paragraph 3 of that letter the geographical area and presence of large numbers of tributaries of Bhootahi Balan river find mention as main reasons for recurrence of flood. A permanent solution has been suggested by the Circle Officer after consultation with the local populous and representatives of the Panchayat. The suggestion is to the effect that the eastern embankment of Bhootahi Balan river should be extended till village Suriyahi. That is the prayer made in the writ petition also so that a population of about 7000 in the said village may be protected from recurring havoc of flood. Learned counsel for the petitioner raised a grievance that even after lapse of about 1½ years no concrete action has been taken in the matter and the petitioner as well as the other residents of the area are apprehensive that their lives and properties may again be under threat if corrective measures are not taken in time. In our considered opinion, it is for the expert to make a detailed study of a topography of the area and find 3 out what remedial measure in the form of embankment should be taken and thereafter the execution of the plans has to be dependent upon availability of the fund as per priority. These factors along with need of the residents to get protection from recurring flood should be kept in mind by the District Magistrate, Madhubani, respondent no. 11, who is directed to take up the matter with the concerned authorities so that appropriate action in the larger public interest is taken without any delay. Even if the execution of the decision is delayed for some unavoidable reasons then the decision itself should be communicated to the affected persons, such as, the petitioner, at an early date, preferably within three months from the date of filing of the fresh representation before the District Magistrate, Madhubani along with a copy of this order. The writ petition is, thus, disposed of. SC (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)