Disposed

Forum for Good Governance, v. Government of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC17 Feb 2022PIL/236/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed a PIL seeking directions to prevent drinking water contamination in Hyderabad. The Court noted significant expenditure on new pipelines and labs. It directed respondents to replace remaining old pipelines causing contamination within six months to ensure pure drinking water.

What did the court decide?

Six months to replace old pipelines causing contamination and ensure pure drinking water; no further orders on status reporting.

Forum for Good Governance, Vs Government of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

¶5

PUBLIC INT REST LITIGATION NO: 236 0F 2013

¶6

Between:

¶7

Forum for Good Governance, Having its reglstered office at Flat No. 204, G.K.R Mansion, Lakdikapool, Saifabad, Hyderabad - 500004, Represented by its Secretary, M, Padmanabha Reddy, S/o l,4. Ganga Reddy.

¶8

...PET|T|ONER

¶9

AND

¶10

Government of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by the Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶11

2 Hyderabad [,4e1ro Water Supply and Sewerage Board, Represented by its, Vice chairman and lVlanaging Drrector'

¶12

RES'.NDENTS

¶13

Petition under Adlicle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to:

¶14

1. to direct the Respondents to take immediate remedial steps in terms of comprehensive report of July, 2010 to prevent drinking water contamination;

¶15

1. to direct the Respondents to submit quarterly status reports on the progress made in terms of comprehensive report July, 2010; 3) to take steps to prevent leakage and filterage of drinking water from the pipelines of the 2nd Respondent.

¶16

PILMP, N O: 369 OF 20'13

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents immediately to implement the Report of July, 2010. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. C. SUMON

¶18

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 :

¶19

GP FOR MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

¶20

counsel for the Respondent No.2: sRl T. SUDHAKAR REDDY SC FOR HMWSSB

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

THE HON'BL ' THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SI{AI1MA AND

¶23

THE HO:^''BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

¶24

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No.236 of2013

¶25

ORDER: *?. r/x 11(]n'bie tlte ahre,/ JLstice .SrIrsl⁽ la,rdir ,shar"r.rl

¶26

Thc pc ti ioner before this Coult h:rs lilecl this public lntert:st liiigalion s tat i: g that the petition(r is i: registered societr, irrolved ir the u e1[arr of peopie and as colltilminated \'ilter^,,,, as being suppiied to tl , r-srd"n.. |r..r ,.. l. .., n,,, .s.'r r.s- , r 1: Iing rhe publ . interest litigatlon. The lolloriing prarcr lras been rr-Lade in the pr bLic interest litig.rtion i- "Ft r the reasons stated in the accompanfing aftlclavit, rh". petitioner lerein prays that this Hon'bie Court may be pleased 1) to direct the Respondents io take immediate remedial r ieps in terms of comprehensive report ot July, 2010 to prevent dl nking water contaminatioo; 2l to direct the Respondents to submit quarteriy status rel frts on the progress made in terms of comprehensive report Jul ',2010; 3) to take steps to prevent leakage and lilterage of d nking \ ater from the pipelines oI the 2nd Respondent and to pe rs such other or further orders as are deemed fit and proper in he circumstances of the case.'

¶27

¶28

A dctail, d and an exhaustive counter affidavit has ber:r'r filed in the mattel and the counter aflid:rvit llLed bl the \lunir:iral Adninistratior & Urban Dcrcloprncnt I)cpirrtrnenl icrcais :hat as manl as Rs. 152.00 crores have bcen spcnt b\ tlre H..C.-rtrbad M c tropolittrr r Vatcr SuppLv ernci Scsclagc Boeucl br lavir:g rcri pipclrn e s anc in oLhe r ri orcls, il r-ridci- lo ens-rrL tlLil: ficsl-l drinking t ate lree from contamir-ration is pror iclecl io lhe :eside nts of Hvderabad It h:rs also becn sttlted that funds ar€ being

received from JNNURM and every year new pipelines are being laid on priority basis [or improvemenr ot water supply in slum areas. Details have also been furnished in respect of improvement of water supply lrom time to time. It has been stated before this Court that 991 kms of old pipelines have been replaced and it is an ongoing process.

¶33

It has also been stated that as many as seven laboratories have been established and as many as 1500 samples are drawn every day to check the water quality.

¶34

In the light of the aforesaid, no further orders are required to be passed in the present public interest litigation. However, the respondents are direcred to ensure that the areas where there are still old pipelincs * hich are resurting in contamination or water, the same shall be rc-placed u,irh ne,,r, pipelines within a period ol six months from todav and the respondents are also directed to ensure that the residents of Hl,derabad do get pure drinking water free from conramination in all the localities.

¶35

The Public Interest Litigation is accordingly disposed of.

¶36

The miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand

¶37

closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶38

SD/- T.JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶39

//TRUE COPY// sEcTtoN oFF|CER

¶40

To,

¶41

'l . The Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration and Urban Development -^{P.epartment, Government of Andhra pradesh, Secretariat, Hyderabab.} 2. The Vice Chairman and Managing Director, Hyderabad tvietrb Water Supply and Sewerage Board.

¶42

3 Qne QQ to Sri C. Sumon. Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to GP for Municipal Administratioh and Urban Development, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] 5. One CC to Sri T. Sudhakar Reddy, SC FOR HN/WSSB tOpUCl CHR SW

\$,

HIGH COURT

DATED:1710212022

ORDER

P.l.L.No.236 rf 2013

DISPOSING OF THE P.I.L. WITHOUT^(iOSTS

¶50

3?P
q
ktr*

Forum for Good Governance, v. Government of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Forum for Good Governance, v. Government of Andhra Pradesh

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

Jayanagar Colony Welfare Association Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Sarampalli Mallareddy, Vs The Union of India, Rep. by its Cabinet Secretary

Kavali Venkataiah Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Borla Ramaswamy, Vs The Government of Ap

Vaddadi Murali, Vs Union of India rep by its the Secretary

Nature Park Walkers Asociation, Hyd Vs Prl Secy, Forest Dept., Hyd and 2 Ot

Mr. Mohammed Haji, Vs Broadcasting Corporation Of India

N. Dolendra Prasad Vs The State of Telangana

Madhusudan Reddy Anumula Vs The State of Telangana and 16 others

Sri Mohd. Niyamatullah Khan, Vs Prl.Secy., Ma. and Ud., Hyd., and Another

Bank of Baroda and another Vs M/s. Shri Avenues Private Limited and 2 others

M v Bhaskara Rao(Ips), Secunderabad and 3 Others Vs Chief Secy, State of Telangana, Hyderabad and 7 Others

Boini Venkatesham Vs Kondu Ramaiah

The Depot Manager, Karimnagar Dist. Vs P. Kantaiah, Karimnagar Dist.