SANTOSH MEHTA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition complains that between the second tube-well which has been installed, the first one should not be shut off and both should continue as Patna needs water. As Counsel for the petitioner was submitting, the submissions were interjected by the Counsel for the Patna Water Board, Mr. Prem Kumar Verma, submitting before the Court that a similar matter is before another Bench and the petitioner ought to have mentioned this and the petition is a duplication and is otherwise misplaced.

(2.) It depends on how this matter is viewed. In mediocrity or a true concern about conserving and preserving a precious natural resource-ground water. To that extent, may be both the petitioner and the respondents may not have perceived what environment and ecology is about.

(3.) The only thing which needs to be kept in mind is scarcity of water, in consumption and production both. This petition is about water as a municipal supply to those who live within the city, an urban habitat.