Disposed

Chandulal Mohanlal Biyani v. the Chief Enginer Maharashtra State Power Generation Co. Ltd. and Others

Bombay HC5 Jul 2019PIL/77/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this PIL regarding water scarcity in Parali-Vaijnath, the petitioner sought directions to lift water from a dam via the power generation company. The Court found the petitioner lacked technical data regarding water availability and noted the Collector had the power to manage water reserves. The petition was disposed of without granting directions.

What did the court decide?

None. The petition seeking directions to lift water was not granted.

Chandulal Mohanlal Biyani Vs the Chief Enginer… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

10-PIL.77-19.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.77 OF 2019

¶4

CHANDULAL MOHANLAL BIYANI

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

THE CHIEF ENGINER,

¶7

 MAHARASHTRA STATE POWER GENERATION CO. LTD.,
 AND OTHERS

¶8

Mr. S.V.Suryawanshi, Advocate for petitioner
Mr. P.S.Patil, AGP for respondent nos.3 to 8

¶9

 CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE

¶10

 AND
R.G. AVACHAT, JJ.
 DATE : JULY 05, 2019

¶11

PER COURT :-

¶12

Heard Mr.Suryawanshi, learned Counsel for the

¶13

petitioner and Mr.Patil, learned AGP for respondent
nos.3 to 8.

¶14

2.In the present Public Interest Litigation, the
petitioner raises an issue of public interest in
respect of providing drinking water to the residents of
Parali-Vaijnath city, which is facing a severe shortage

¶15

2 10-PIL.77-19

¶16

of drinking water. Learned Counsel for the

¶17

petitioner, in support of his submissions, tenders
across the bar a copy of the letter dated 15.05.2019
sent to the Collector, Beed by the Sub-Divisional
Officer, Parali-Vaijnath (which is not part of the
petition). The same is taken on record and marked
“X” for the purpose of identification.

¶18

3.This Court is aware of the situation
prevailing in the State of Maharashtra in general and
in the region of Marathwada in particular i.e. large
scarcity of water in most of the districts of
Marathwada region due to inadequate rainfall for
preceding years. Even accepting this position, we are
unable to entertain the petition for the reasons
stated below :

¶19

4.The petitioner prays for giving directions
to respondent no.9 to lift water from Khadka Dam and
provide it to the residents of Parali-Vaijnath city
and for that purpose, issue necessary writ or order.

¶20

3 10-PIL.77-19

¶21

5.Respondent no.1 is the Chief Engineer,
Maharashtra State Power Generation Co. Ltd.;
respondent no.2 is another Officer of Maharashtra
State Power Generation Co. Ltd.; respondent no.3 is
Tahsildar, Parli-Vaijnath; respondent no.4 is Sub-
Divisional Officer, Parli-Vaijnath; respondent no.5

¶22

is Collector, Beed; respondent nos.6 to 8 are
respective Secretaries of various departments of the
State of Maharashtra; and respondent no.9 is the
Chief Officer, Parli-Vaijnath Municipal Council.

¶23

6.Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits
that the water storage available with respondent no.1
is more than sufficient for utilisation and
generation of power. He further submits that as there
is surplus water with respondent no.1, the same can
be provided to the residents of Parali-Vaijnath City
by permitting respondent no.9 to lift the same from
the Khadka Dam.

¶24

4 10-PIL.77-19

¶25

7.The submissions made by learned Counsel for

¶26

the petitioner are without any supporting material as
to how much quantity of water is available with
respondent no.1, how much quantity of water is needed
for power generation and how much water is being kept
as reserved for power generation unit. Secondly, all
these aspects are of some technical expertise. We do
not hesitate to state that this Court is not expert
in the field of power generation so as to find that
“X” quantity of water is sufficient enough or “Y”
quantity for water is needed for power generation and
how much water is available apart from its
utilisation for power generation.

¶27

8.Further, the communication dated 11.06.2019,

¶28

which is placed on record by the petitioner at
Exh.'E' (page 21) to the petition, shows that
respondent no.1 informed respondent no.9 – Chief
Officer, Municipal Council, Parali-Vaijnath, that

¶29

5 10-PIL.77-19

¶30

necessary demand can be raised at the level of

¶31

central office of Maharashtra State Power Generation
Company through water resources department, so that
there can be a decision for release of water from
Jaikwadi Dam and in turn, for providing it to Parali-
Vaijnath city through another small dam. There is no
material placed on record post this communication so
as to show that the Chief Officer, Municipal Council,
Parali-Vaijnath took some action after receipt of the
letter dated 11.06.2019. There is another document
placed on record i.e. copy of an appeal published in

¶32

the local newspaper at the instance of the Municipal
Council, Parali-Vaijnath. Perusal of the same shows
that the residents of Parali-Vaijnath have been
appraised of the water scarcity and that they would

¶33

be provided water by tankers. They also have been
asked to utilise the water economically and with
precaution.

¶34

6 10-PIL.77-19

¶35

9.Evenassumingexchangeofthe

¶36

communications between the Sub-Divisional Officer,
Parali-Vaijnath and the District Collector, Beed,
dated 15.05.2019, it is revealed that the Collector
being the revenue head in the district, possesses
ample and sufficient power to take appropriate steps
for keeping water reserve for drinking purposes and
to make necessary arrangement to provide water either
from natural water sources or from private water
resources. It is not necessary for this Court to
guide the district administration of the steps they
should take. We hope and trust that the Collector,
Beed and the Sub-Divisional Officer would take

¶37

appropriate steps considering the grave scarcity of
drinking water in Parali-Vaijnath city.

¶38

10.The Public Interest Litigation, in our

¶39

opinion, needs no indulgence of this Court and the
observations made herein above as regards respondent
no.5 – Collector, would take care of the situation.

¶40

7 10-PIL.77-19

¶41

With the above observations, the Public Interest

¶42

Litigation is disposed of.

¶43

11.Authenticated copy of this order be provided
to learned AGP. Learned AGP to communicate this

¶44

order to respondent no.5 expeditiously.

¶45

kbp

Chandulal Mohanlal Biyani v. the Chief Enginer Maharashtra State Power Generation Co. Ltd. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandulal Mohanlal Biyani v. the Chief Enginer Maharashtra State Power Generation Co. Ltd. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nivas Maruti Mane and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Ors.

Mr. Vasudev Ananta Bhoir Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Nivas Maruti Mane and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Ors.

Vidarbha Mazdoor Sangh, Nagpur Thr. President, Shubham Manoharji Wahane Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Honble District Collector, Nagpur and Others

Mrs. Swati Sayaji Patil Vs State of Maharashtra through the Principal Secretary and Anr.

Nalin Kalyanji Vira Vs Municipal Commissioner of M.C.of Greater Mumbai and 7 Ors.

Santoshi Milind More Vs State of Maharashtra and 2 Ors.

Mr. Rajkumar Shukla Vs the State of Maharashtra and 2 Ors.

Vimalbai Ashokchand Kankariya Vs State of Maharashtra and Others

Neeta Prabhu Dhimdhime Vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.

Sakhubai Piraji Madale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Dhanraj Ramrao Jadhav and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sk. Sujauddin Sk. Khaliluddin Vs the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary and Others

Mauli Sevabhavi Sanstha, Raimoha Thr President Vs the State of Mah and Ors.