MITA PANDEY Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Public Interest Litigation for getting drinking water for the Pakur District and for which this Court entertained the Public Interest Litigation as back on 15.3.2008 and on 26.5.2009. The State Counsel was given time to seek instruction from the Deputy Commissioner, Pakur in regard to supply of drinking water in the District of Pakur, and on 15.7.2009, the respondent -State was directed to ensure the purified not contaminated water is supplied in the District of Pakur and was directed to take adequate steps for this purpose. On 23.11.2009, it was observed by the Court that the petitioner also could not place some material fact with regard to the potability and the State was directed to take few samples of water from Pakur District and get them tested in Govt. Laboratory. On 28.9.2010, the State was directed to come out with a comprehensive policy on providing drinking water and management related to the water issue and the progress in this regard. On 4.1.2011, the Court observed that the State was not in a position to show anything on the issue and observed that it showed the indifference of the concerned persons and even the Court issued the notice to the respondent as to why the proceeding for contempt of Court may not be initiated against them for willfully not obeying the order of this Court. On 10.1.2011, again it was observed by the Court that the arguments of the State shows total non performance and other harsh observations were there. On 11.2.2011, the Court observed that we do not have any concrete road plan as to how these townships of Pakur/ Sahebganj would be provided water because so far neither there is any plan made out for laying down pipelines in these cities nor there is any assurance that there will be sufficient water to flow in these pipelines. We have mentioned about only a few orders passed up to 24.2.2011, and thereafter, several detailed orders were passed which includes order dated 22.6.2011, 16.11.2011, 13.2.2012, 19.3.2012, 23.4.2012, and thereafter, now on 26.6.2012, an affidavit has been submitted by the Superintending Engineer, Drinking Water and Sanitation Circle, Dumka. In the affidavit, it has been submitted that the tender for the work was floated by the Drinking Water and Sanitation Department, Government of Jharkhand in the month of October, 2011 and the work was awarded to the lowest bidder i.e. M/s Doshion Veolia Water Solutions-a firm of Gujarat. The agreement was also executed on 22.3.2012, wherein it has been provided that the work will be completed on or before 21.3.2014. We have considered Sub-para A to J of Para 6 of the Affidavit, and from these averments, it appears that the work is dependent upon the cooperation of the Government of West Bengal. May it be, for obtaining a very small piece of land measuring 406 sq.mtrs only, out of which, the West Bengal Government has already agreed for allocation of 200 sq.mtrs land. In Clause-B of Para -6, it has been pointed out that there are encroachments over road by private houses, shops and boundaries in length of about 500 meters, which is required to be cleared by the administration of the West Bengal Government, particularly, by the District Magistrate and the Collector, Murshidabad for Elevated Service Reservoir, Laying of Pipe Lines and crossing railway track on Railway land is also dependent upon the administrative authorities of Howrah of West Bengal as well as administration of Railways. Some land acquisitions are also required.

(2.) Looking to these relevant issues as well as looking to the time already consumed of more than four years by the State authorities and allocation of the work to private company after four years from taking cognizance by this Court, clearly indicates that the time table given in the agreement with private party may not be a realistic projection, and therefore, to make it a real time programme, we deem it proper that the notice may be issued to the State of West Bengal through the Chief Secretary, so that this Court may have effective monitoring for the persons fighting for obtaining adequate supply of drinking water.

(3.) Leaned counsel for the State submitted that so far the water supply is concerned, it is-running in the District of Pakur, but that may not be adequate as per the petitioner.