The petitioner, a resident of Ward No.2 of Panachikkad Grama Panchayat has filed this writ petition challenging the action of the 1st respondent in digging a well in his ward. The allegation of the petitioner is that, the digging of a large well would deplete the ground water resources of the area and the consequence would be that the other wells in the ward would get dried up by the flow of ground water into the new large well. Though the petitioner and others had submitted complaints to the Panchayat Authorities, according to them, no action has been taken thereon, till date.
2. This writ petition was admitted on 27.06.2014. On 09.07.2014, an interim direction has been issued directing respondents 2 to 4 to stop further construction activities of the well in dispute in Ward No.2 for a period of two months. The said order having been extended from time to time continues to be in force.
3. According to the counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent as well as the additional 5th respondent, the writ petition has been filed making allegations that are totally baseless. It is the case of the respondents that, the Panchayat is in the process of implementing a programme for the purpose of finding a lasting solution for the problem of shortage of water in the Panchayat. The programme is called the “Jalanidhi” and is a World Bank aided scheme. The location of the well has been fixed, after conducting a Geological Survey of the locality and identifying the particular place as “safe”. Therefore, it is contended that there are absolutely no grounds to hold up the construction at the instance of the petitioner. Separate counter affidavits have been filed by respondents 2 and 5. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit in answer to the statements made in the counter affidavits. According to the counsel for the petitioner, as per Ext.P4, information obtained under the Right to Information Act, he has been informed that the Ground Water Department had not conducted any survey as alleged by the respondents. Therefore, he seeks the issue of appropriate directions stopping the construction of the well.
4. Heard. Though it is contended by the petitioner that, the digging of the well in question would result in the wells in the surrounding area getting dried up by the flow of ground water into the new well, absolutely no material has been produced to substantiate the said allegation. The counsel for the petitioner could not reveal the basis for the conclusions of the petitioner, in spite of pointed questions from the Court. Therefore, there is no material to conclude whether the apprehension expressed by the petitioner is justified or not.
5. According to the counter affidavit of the 2nd respondent, the Panchayat is an area where there has always been shortage of water.
The above perennial problem has been addressed by the Panchayat and a solution is sought to be found by implementing the “Jalanidhi” project with the financial support of the World Bank, Central and State Governments. It is contended that, the implementation of the project was preceded by a technical study on the basis of which, the location of the well has been identified. The statements made to the said effect in paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit are extracted hereunder for convenience of reference :
“The technical ground water survey conducted in the Panchayath selected the present location in Ward No.2 where ground water availability is found 'SAFE' by technical experts for the Jalanidhi Project for the benefit of people residing in Ward No.4. The 'Well' of this project is situated within 20 meters beside the Kuttippuzhamoola-Parackalkadavu stream, a distributory of the River Kodoor which is flowing along with Northern side of this Panchayath. The water level in the stream does not fall below the normal even during summer. This also was a reason for fixing the above location in Ward No.2.”
6. In view of the dispute raised by the counsel for the petitioner that no survey as alleged was ever conducted, a copy of the ground water investigation report conducted by Sri.K.P.Pradeep, Retired Senior Hydro Geologist, Ground Water Department has been handed over to me across the Bar. A perusal of the said report shows that, the present location of the well has been identified on the basis thereof and that the location has been described as “SAFE”. In the face of the above technical assessment of the location of the situs of the well, I do not find any grounds to interdict the digging thereof in implementation of the programme. It is also stated by the respondents that, the “Jalanidhi” project envisages not merely the sinking of a single well, but what is contemplated is the digging of as many as 28 wells throughout the Panchayat. There are various other methods that are also being adopted like well re-charging and construction of pits for rain water harvesting. The concerted object of the Panchayat is to find a solution for the scarcity of drinking water in the Panchayat.
7. In view of the above submissions, I do not find any justification for the objections raised by the petitioner against the digging of the well. Absolutely no material or evidence has been placed before me to justify a conclusion that the statements made in the counter affidavits filed on behalf of the Panchayat as well as the 5th respondent are wrong.
For the above reasons, the writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE.
AV