Allowed

M.M. Varughese v. Kerala Water Authority

Kerala HC13 Feb 2024WP(C)/1865/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition concerning lack of drinking water supply in Kadavanthra, the Court directed the Kerala Water Authority to commence a new tendering process within one month and complete pipe line laying within four months to ensure water supply.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner's writ petition was allowed; a time-frame of one month for tendering and four months for completing works was fixed for the first respondent.

M.M. Varughese Vs Kerala Water Authority — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 24TH MAGHA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 1865 OF 2024

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

M.M. VARUGHESE
AGED 83 YEARS
S/O.LATE MATHEW, MATHURAMPOYKAYIL HOUSE, 55/1767,
LLLICKAL LANE, K.P. VALLON ROAD, KADAVANTHRA,
KOCHI, PIN - 682020
BY ADV MANU ROY

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

1 KERALA WATER AUTHORITY JALABHAVAN, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, PIN - 695033

¶9

2 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, WATER WORKS SUB DIVISION, PALLIMUKKU, KOCHI, PIN - 682016

¶10

3 CORPORATION OF KOCHI KOCHI , REP BY ITS SECRETARY., PIN - 682011 BY ADV SOBHAN GEORGE SRI.GEORGIE JOHNY- SC SRI.K.JANARDHANA SHENOY - SC

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
13.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

WP(C) NO. 1865 OF 2024 2

¶13

JUDGMENT

¶14

The petitioner, who is stated to be a resident of “Kadavanthra” area of Kochi and in particular the Illickal Lane, allege that the Kerala Water Authority (‘KWA’) is not taking necessary steps to provide citizens like him drinking water, in spite of their obligation to do so under the applicable statutes. He thus prays that respondents 1 and 2 be directed to take urgent steps to supply drinking water to the area in question, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court; with an adscititious plea that the water tank at “Kadavanthra” be ordered to be made ‘usable’ also, without any avoidable delay.

¶15

In response to the afore submissions of Sri.Manu Roy – learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel for the ‘KWA’ – Sri.Georgie Johny, conceded that there is a problem in the area in question because, the distribution pipe lines have not been fully laid. He explained that, even though a contractor was earlier entrusted with the work, he had shied away from completing it; and therefore, that his client is in the process of identifying a fresh tenderer, through a new tendering process. He submitted that once the tendering process is over and the pine lines are installed, the water tank at “Kadavanthra” will be made ‘usable’, so that the drinking water problem of the area in question will be allayed to the extent possible.

¶16

WP(C) NO. 1865 OF 2024 3

¶17

No doubt, citizens are entitled to drinking water and it is a fundamental duty of the ‘KWA’ to provide the same, as per the applicable statutes. However, since the learned Standing Counsel for the ‘KWA’ explains as afore, I deem it necessary that certain specified time frames be stipulated, since the citizens like the petitioner cannot be allowed to continue to face detriment ad infinitum.

¶18

In the afore circumstances, with the consent of both sides, I allow this writ petition with the following directions:

¶19

(a) I record the submissions of Sri.Georgie Johny that, new tendering process is in the anvil and necessary steps in this regard will be completed at the earliest. I thus fix a period of one month for this purpose; and consequently direct the 1^st respondent – KWA to ensure that the work in question is completed within a period of four months thereafter.

¶20

(b) On the work of laying of the pipe lines being completed as afore, necessary steps for operationalizing the water tank at “Kadavanthra” will also be taken; thus making sure that all the residents of the area get water supply without any impediment in future.

¶21

After I dictated this part of the judgment, Sri.Georgie Johny

¶22

WP(C) NO. 1865 OF 2024 4

¶23

submitted that, most of the time, contractors are apprehensive of taking up work for his client, because, they encounter public protest hampering their work; and therefore, prayed that the ‘KWA’ be given liberty to approach the competent Police Officers, seeking protection when such works were taken forward.

¶24

No doubt, if there is any illegal action from any side, it is for the Police to intervene; and the liberty of the ‘KWA’ to approach them for necessary protection, is always left open.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

MC/13.2

¶29

WP(C) NO. 1865 OF 2024 5

¶30

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1865/2024

¶31

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1A COPY OF MASS REPRESENTATION DATED 15-09-
2023 SUBMITTED BY PEOPLE OF CENTRAL
KADAVANTHRA

M.M. Varughese v. Kerala Water Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.M. Varughese v. Kerala Water Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Safeermon a Vs Remla Beevi I

Shine Mathew Vs Remla Beevi . I

K Manoharan, Vs the Kerala Water Authority

Rency George Vs Mohammed Ali

M.K.Joseph Vs State of Kerala

Agnes Michale Vs Cheranelloor Grama Panchayath