Jharkhand High Court
Sidheshwar Mandal vs The State Of Jharkhand & Others on 2 September, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(PIL) No.667 of 2018
-----
Sidheshwar Mandal ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Others ... ... Respondents
-------
CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI
-------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajeeva Sharma, Sr. Advocate : Mrs. Rita Kumari, Advocate : Mr. Om Prakash, Advocate : Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ashutosh Anand, A.A.G.-III : Mr. Sahbaj Akhtar, AC to AAG-III For the UOI : Mr. Abhijeet Kr. Singh, Advocate For the Resp. No.6 : Mr. Rahul Lamba, Advocate : Mr. Navneet Prakash, Advocate
------
nd Order No. 16/Dated 2 September, 2024
1. Reference may be made to the order dated 30.08.2024 in pursuance thereto, Mr. Mast Ram Meena, Secretary, Drinking Water and Sanitation Department, Government of Jharkhand is present.
2. An affidavit has been filed today on behalf of the State which is taken on record.
3. In the affidavit, it has been stated that 210 days is still to be taken in completion of the project which is for supply of drinking water to the local residents of the Sahebganj district.
4. This Court has perused the record.
5. The time mentioned for completion of the project is further 210 days that too for the purpose of supply of 1 drinking water to the local residents of the district of Sahebganj is not being accepted by this Court, reason for the same is that first it is a question of supply of drinking water to the local residents of the district of Sahebganj.
6. We are conscious that the right to life is the fundamental right as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
7. The non-supply of water or the smooth supply of water will come under the fold of infringement of right to life because without water there is no imagination of nature and what to say about survival of the mankind.
8. The second reason is that earlier to the present Public Interest Litigation, an another Public Interest Litigation was filed being W.P.(PIL) No.1479 of 2008. The said Public Interest Litigation was disposed of vide order dated 02.08.2016 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court.
9. We have gone through the said order which is appended as Annexure-2 to the paper book wherefrom it is evident that several affidavits have been filed by the State of Jharkhand.
10. This Court (Coordinate Bench) has come to the conclusion by going through various counter affidavits that enough steps have been taken for providing drinking water at Pakur and District Sahebganj which led the Coordinate 2 Bench not to monitor the said writ petition on account of the fact that the High Court is having no expertise in the matter, for ready reference, the aforesaid order is being referred herein :-
"1. Having heard counsels for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and also looking to the counter affidavits filed by the respondent-State, it appears that enough steps have been taken for providing drinking water at Pakur and District Sahebganj. It appears that there is no further need of monitoring the supply of water by the State of Jharkhand to the aforesaid two districts. It is further expected from the State of Jharkhand that they shall complete their projects for the aforesaid two districts for supply of drinking water so that in almost all areas which are practically possible to supply the drinking water in the aforesaid two districts. Enough monitoring has already been done by the High Court and the High Court has no expertise knowledge of supplying the drinking water, Court is not a Cost Accountant or Charter Accountant or an Engineer.
2. With these observations, this writ petition is hereby, disposed of. All the interlocutory applications, which are pending, are also disposed of."
11. It has been pointed out Mr. Rajeeva Sharma, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, that the project since has not completed even after disposal of the aforesaid writ petition being W.P.(PIL) No.1479 of 2008 for about two years, thereafter the present Public Interest Litigation being W.P.(PIL) No.667 of 2018 has been filed.
12. It is evident from the various orders passed in this proceeding, particularly the order No.9 dated 01.05.2024, 3 wherein reference of supplementary affidavit has been taken note of which is also mentioned in the order dated 11.03.2024 wherein it has been indicated that so far as Ward Nos. 17, 18, 19,22, 23 and 24 are concerned the water supply work and distribution of pipeline will be completed by 30.04.2024.
13. The submission was made on behalf of the proposed intervenor - the contractor, who is being represented by Mr. Rahul Lamba, learned counsel, that so far as work in Ward Nos. 17, 18, 19, 22, 23 and 24 are concerned, within a period of ten days the incomplete work has been undertaken to be completed.
14. The Coordinate Bench has also made a remark that the project of laying of pipelines as well as water treatment plant was conceived in the year 2012 and even after expiry of more than a decade, there has been very slow progress in the work in question, for ready reference, the order dated 01.05.2024 is being referred as under :-
"An intervention application has been filed by the contractor who was entrusted with the work of laying of pipelines as well as water treatment plants in the town of Sahebganj. Various reasons have been assigned in this Interlocutory application for not completing the work within time.
In the order dated 11.03.2024 reference has been made to the supplementary counter affidavit, wherein it has been indicated that so far as Ward Nos. 17, 18, 19,22, 23 and 24 are concerned the water 4 supply work and distribution of pipeline will be completed by 30.04.2024.
Mr. Ashutosh Anand, learned A.A.G-III has submitted that the deadline could not be met on account of various bottlenecks as well as on account of the slow progress of the work being done by the contractor concerned.
Mr. Navnit Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the proposed intervener has submitted at the bar that so far as work in Ward Nos. 17, 18, 19, 22, 23 and 24 are concerned, within a period of ten days the same shall be completed.
The project of laying of pipelines as well as water treatment plant was conceived in the year 2012 and even after expiry of more than a decade, there has been very slow progress in the work in question.
In view of the aforesaid submissions, let this case be listed on 06.05.2024 under the heading 'For Orders'.
Mr. Navnit Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the proposed intervener has stated that he shall ensure the presence of the proposed intervener on the next date of listing."
15. It appears from the order dated 06.05.2024 passed by the Coordinate Bench wherein it has been taken note that the incomplete work of laying of pipelines shall be completed in Ward Nos. 17, 18, 19, 22, 23 and 24 within a week.
16. So far as the rest part of the work is concerned, it has been submitted that there is a delay on account of the fact that some of the lands fall within the Railway area for which the Drinking Water and Sanitation department has already sought for a 'No Objection' from the Railways. 5
17. This Court has also taken note on the basis of the instruction of the learned State counsel that a meeting has been fixed tomorrow, i.e., on 07.05.2024, between the officials of the Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation as well as the Railway officials and it is expected that within a month a 'No Objection Certificate' shall be issued which will facilitate the laying of pipelines so far as the rest of the Wards are concerned, for ready reference dated 06.05.2024 is being referred herein which reads hereunder as :-
"Pursuant to the order dated 01.05.2024, the intervener who is the contractor undertaking the work of laying of pipelines is physically present. He has submitted that within a week the laying of pipelines shall be completed in Ward Nos. 17, 18, 19, 22, 23 and 24. So far as the rest part of the work is concerned, it has been submitted that there is a delay on account of the fact that some of the lands fall within the Railway area for which the Drinking Water and Sanitation department has already sought for a 'No Objection' from the Railways.
Mr. Vineet Chandra, learned A.C. to A.A.G.-III on instruction has submitted that tomorrow a meeting has been fixed between the officials of the Department of Drinking Water and Sanitation as well as the Railway officials and it is expected that within a month a 'No Objection Certificate' shall be issued which will facilitate the laying of pipelines so far as the rest of the Wards are concerned.
In view of the said submission, let this matter be listed on 13th June, 2024."6
18. The matter was again taken up on 26.06.2024. Learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.6-the contractor, has submitted that the work of laying of pipeline of six wards have already been completed. So far as the rest of the works are concerned, the respondent no. 6 is being prevented from laying the waterlines on account of No Objection having not been received from the Railways as part of the proposed pipeline which go through the land, belongs to the Railways.
19. The submission made on behalf of the State has also been taken note that in spite of the repeated requests being made to the Railway authority to furnish 'No Objection Certificate', the 'No Objection Certificate' is not being furnished.
20. Learned counsel for the Railway was directed to seek instruction as to why in spite of repeated communications made to it by the District Administrator, No Objection Certificate for laying of pipelines is not being issued, for ready reference, the order dated 26.06.2024 is being referred herein which reads as under :-
"Mr. Rahul Lamba, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.6-Contractor has submitted that the work of laying of pipeline of six wards have already been completed. So far as the rest of the works are concerned, the respondent no. 6 is being prevented from laying the waterlines on account of No Objection having not been received from the Railways 7 as part of the proposed pipeline which go through the land, belongs to the Railways.
Mr. Binit Chandra, A.C to learned A.A.G-III has submitted that requests are repeatedly being made to the Railways to furnish No Objection Certificate and in absence of the same, though the work has been completed in six wards, but the supply of water in those wards are being affected.
In view of the submissions advanced by A.C to A.A.GIII and Mr. Rahul Lamba, learned counsel appearing for the intervener Contractor, we direct the learned counsel for the petitioner to add the Union of India as party respondent no. 7 in this Public Interest Litigation.
Mr. Abhijit Kumar Singh, learned Central Government Counsel who is present, is directed to take instruction as to why in spite of repeated communications made by the District Administration to the Railway Authorities, No Objection Certificate is not being issued, which has led to hampering of supply of water in the six wards, in which the pipeline has already been laid.
Mr. Binit Chandra, A.C to learned AAG-III who is filing an affidavit specifying the bottlenecks which has led to delay in the project of laying of water pipelines in the city of Sahebganj, is directed to serve a copy of the same to Mr. Abhijit Kumar Singh, learned Central Government Counsel, who accepts notice on behalf of the newly added respondent no. 7.
Since, Eastern Railways, Malda Division is supposed to grant No Objection Certificate who is not a party in this Public Interest Litigation, learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to add the Union of India, through Ministry of Railways as party respondent no. 7.
Mr. Abhijit Kumar Singh, learned CGC is directed to take instruction from the respondent no. 7 as to why in spite of repeated communications made 8 to it by the District Administrator, No Objection Certificate for laying of pipelines is not being issued by it.
Let this matter be listed on 25.07.2024. Let a copy of this order be handed over to learned counsel for the respective parties.
Let the name of Mr. Abhijit Kumar Singh, learned CGC appearing on behalf of newly added respondent no. 7 be reflected in the cause-list."
21. Again the matter was taken up on 25.07.2024 but no material information was furnished to the Court save and except that due to non-payment of requisite fees, the process for issuance of No Objection Certificate is not being taken up and, as such, this Court has directed the learned State counsel to verify as to whether the requisite fees has been deposited or not, for ready reference, the order dated 25.07.2024 is being quoted hereunder as :-
"1. A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Assistant Engineer, Eastern Railways, Sahibganj wherein it has been stated that the application for 'No Objection' submitted by the State is being processed and at present pending on account of non-payment of the requisite fees. It has also been stated that the requisite fees have been uploaded in the Online Portal.
2. Mr. Sahbaj Akhtar, A.C. to AAG-III is directed to take instructions as to whether the requisite fees have already been deposited before the Railways or not and if not, the tentative time which would be taken by the concerned authority of the State to deposit the requisite fees
3. At this juncture, Mr. Sahbaj Akhtar, A.C. to AAG- III has referred to the affidavit filed by the respondent Nos.1 and 3 dated 25.06.2024 and submitted that 9 the necessary fees have already been deposited. However, this fact has been denied by Mr. Abhijeet Kumar Singh, C.G.C. appearing for the Eastern Railways.
4. Mr. Sahbaj Akhtar, A.C. to A.G.III is directed to verify the paragraphs mentioned in this affidavit as well as subsequent affidavit which has been filed by the Railways and specifically state as to whether requisite fees as demanded by the Eastern Railways have been deposited before him or not. If the same is already deposited, there does not appear to be any other obstacle on the part of Eastern Railways to issue the No Objection Certificate, which would ensure that further steps be taken for laying of water pipelines in the town of Sahibganj.
5. Let the matter be listed on 1st August, 2024."
22. The Court has further taken note in the order dated 08.08.2024 with respect to the issue of deposit of the requisite fee.
23. The affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Railway on 23.07.2024 wherein it has been stated that one letter under the signature of Executive Engineer, Drinking Water and Sanitation Division, Sahebganj was received on 17.01.2017. Thereafter, after a long gap, an application for getting No Objection Certificate was received on 08.04.2024.
24. The Railway, after receipt of the said application, had telephonically contacted with the Assistant Engineer and Junior Engineer of the Drinking Water and Sanitation department but due to Lok Sabha Election, no steps could be taken. Again, online application was made on 10 10.05.2024 which was forwarded to Malda Division for further action.
25. It has been stated at paragraph 9 of the affidavit that based upon the online status of application, it has been found to be pending for payment of fee by the contractor.
26. It has been stated at paragraph 10 that on receipt of the fee, No Objection Certificate will be issued.
27. Today an affidavit has been filed sworn by the Executive Engineer, Drinking Water and Sanitation Division, Sahebganj.
28. We have gone through the statement made at paragraph-10 and 11 wherefrom it is evident that the entire schedule of work has been divided in two zones.
29. Paragraph-10 speaks about the work of Zone-I. It has been stated that against the target of 15159.25 meter distribution pipeline, 4043 meter has been laid and out of 12,598 house connections, 1871 have been provided. The remaining work of Zone-I is to be completed within next six months and it will cover 12,598 household.
30. The progress of the work of water supply is being shown by way of a tabular chart appended at page-20 which is dated 31.08.2024. The Column No.12 which pertains to water supply status, wherefrom it is evident that although the statement has been made that in the 11 household area falling under Zone-I against the target of 15159.25 meter distribution pipeline, 4043 meter has been laid and out of 12,598 house connections, 1871 have been provided, which appears to be in conflict with the details furnished at Col. No.12 where it has been shown in most of the Wards water supply 'not started' or 'partially started'.
31. It needs to refer herein as is being pleaded that NOC is required from Railway for Zone-II. The NOC is nothing to do with the installation of pipeline for Zone-I then why the plea of non-furnishing of the NOC for the work in Zone-I where no NOC is required because the land is not falling within the jurisdiction of the Railway, is being taken.
32. This Court, therefore, is of the view that it is nothing but playing with the life of the people of the Jharkhand and not only that, by filing false affidavit by the concerned Executive Engineer or the contractor.
33. So far as Zone-II is concerned, reference has been furnished at paragraph - 11. It has been stated therein that the Railway has generated demand of Rs.1,32,69,081 and for paying this amount department has initiated the process. One letter was issued by the State of Jharkhand requesting the Railway, being letter No.1278 dated 12.08.2024, to provide the details of the account in which the amount was to be deposited.
12
34. The affidavit so filed seeking 210 days, time, this Court is of the view that this affidavit is to be rejected out- rightly, reason being that when on earlier occasion the affidavit has been filed for completion of the work etc. then where is the occasion again seeking 210 days' time for completion of the work.
35. The further reason for rejecting the instant affidavit is that when NOC is required for Zone-II and not for Zone-I, then why such affidavit has been filed.
36. The Secretary, Drinking Water and Sanitation Department is directed to file further affidavit under his authority.
37. It is evident from the affidavit filed on behalf of the Railway dated 23.07.2024 which also shows the lethargic and negligent attitude of the State, since, in the said affidavit it has been stated that the communication has been made to the Railway way back in the year 2017 and thereafter no follow-up action and subsequent thereto, an application was made to the Railway on 08.04.2024 but no follow-up and thereafter on 18.05.2024 by making online application.
38. The Railway, thereafter, has conducted a joint survey on 18.05.2024 and due to that reason the issue of No Objection Certificate at the end of the Railway is lying pending.
13
39. This Court, therefore, is of the view that the State has not diligently followed the issue that too of water supply to the local residents of district of Sahebganj.
40. The plea has been taken of non-issuance of NOC by the Railway, but why such plea has been taken so far as the installation of pipeline is concerned in the area/Ward falling in Zone-I.
41. It appears that the residents of the district of Sahebganj are contesting the case from the year 2008, since, in the year 2008 one Public Interest Litigation was filed being W.P.(PIL) No.1479 of 2008.
42. This Court has monitored the same for about 08 years and on 02.08.2016 the said Public Interest Litigation was disposed of.
43. Again the present Public Interest Litigation has been filed after lapse of two years when no concrete steps have been taken for supply of uninterrupted water supply to the residents of the district of Sahebganj.
44. Even in this Public Interest Litigation, the affidavits which have been filed on earlier occasions by the Executive Engineer under the authority of the Departmental Head or even the present affidavit is nothing but an eye wash to the Court.
45. There is no explanation that whey the work falling under Zone-I is still not completed. The reference of 14 completed work has been made but that is contradictory to the tabular chart where the water supply has been shown to be 'partially started' or 'not started'.
46. The question is that when out of 12,598 house connections, only 1871 have been provided, as has been stated at paragraph-10 that, which means that there is no uninterrupted water supply.
47. The State itself is saying by contradicting the statement made at paragraph-10 by showing the tabular chart wherein the water supply has been shown to be 'partially started' or 'not started', as would appear from Col. No.12 of the page-20 where the tabular chart has been appended.
48. The Secretary of the Drinking Water and Sanitation Department is present and, as such, he is directed to explain that what action is being proposed to be taken against the erring officials for duping the Court.
49. This order is being passed by way of giving an opportunity to the State to explain as to why the said affidavits be not treated to be a perjury upon the Court.
50. This Court was to call upon the Chief Secretary on the next date of hearing but since the Secretary of the Department has been directed to file an affidavit and, as such, for the moment we are keeping our hands at hold in calling the Chief Secretary.
15
51. It needs to refer herein that calling of the Secretary was warranted by this Court taking into consideration the issue which pertains to non-supply of water to the residents of the district of Sahebganj and the matter is being pursued by the litigants concerned since the year 2008 and still after lapse of about 16 years, the situation is almost same.
52. Let this matter be posted on 10.09.2024 within top five cases.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, A.C.J.) (Arun Kumar Rai, J.) Birendra/ 16