DHANAJIRAO JIVARAO JADHAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners, who are permanent residents of Kolhapur City, have filed this petition as a public interest litigation for directions to the respondents to take immediate measures to eliminate the supply of polluted water to the citizens of Kolhapur as also for implementing water supply scheme of supplying water from Kalammawadi Dam to the city of Kolhapur by closed pipeline.

(2.) IT has been pointed out that as per the survey conducted by the United Nations Organisation (U. N. O. ). Kolhapur is one of the twelve cities in the world which are getting polluted water for drinking purpose. It has also been contended that as per the survey conducted by the U. N. O. , Panchganga river, from where the drinking water is supplied to Kolhapur City, is one of the ten rivers in the world which are having highest polluted water. Due to such polluted water, diseases like gastro-enteritis, jaundice, diarrhoea, dysentery and Dombivli fever are on increase and number of deaths on account of such diseases have been reported. It has been further pointed out that the scheme for supply of drinking water to the city of Kolhapur directly from Kallammawadi Dam by closed pipelines (with 1. 8 diameter), has been accepted by the State Government, respondent No. 1 herein, and if the said scheme is implemented soon, the citizens of Kolhapur will get clean and unpolluted drinking water.

(3.) WHEN the matter came up for admission on 21st April 1997, the learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 3 made a statement that the Corporation would take immediate steps for testing the water supplied to the residents of Kolhapur City and see that the drinking water, according to the standard laid down by the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, is supplied. Upon such statement made by the learned Counsel for the Corporation, the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, respondent No. 5, was directed to take sample occasionally and find out whether water supplied by the Corporation is according to the prescribed standard for drinking. So also, respondent No. 3 was directed to place the report in this behalf before this Court on or before 5th May 1997.