Wagholi Housing Societies Association And ORS Thr. Their Director v. Union Of India Thr Principal Secretary Dept. Of Water Resources And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Digitally signed by TRUSHA TUSHAR MOHITE Date:
2023.04.12 10:26:09 +0530 CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 126 OF 2022 TRUSHA TUSHAR MOHITE Wagholi Housing Societies Association and Ors.
..... Petitioners Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
..... Respondents WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (ST.) NO.5820 OF 2023 IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 126 OF 2022 Anandvan Parisar Residents Forum ..... Applicant In the matter between Wagholi Housing Societies Association and Ors.
...... Petitioners Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
..... Respondents WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1824 OF 2023 IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 126 OF 2022 Undri Housing Society Association ..... Applicant In the matter between Wagholi Housing Societies Association and Ors.
...... Petitioners Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
..... Respondents Mr. Sattyendra Muley a/w Mr.Pranav Dhakne for the Petitioner Mr.Amogh Singh a/w Mr.Pranav Thackur for Respondent no.1 (Union of India) 1/4
Mr.P.P.Kakade, G.P. a/w Mrs.R.A.Salunkhe, A.G.P. for the State Mr.Ameya Abhay Pitale h/f Mr.Ajit Ram Pitale for Respondent no.4 Mr.Abhijit P.Kulkarni a/w Ms.Sweta Shah and Ms.Krushna for Respondent no.6, PMC Mr.Kedar B. Dighe a/w Mr.Archana Gaware for Respondent no.7 PCMC Mr.Rohit Sakhadeo for Respondent no.8, PMRDA Mr.Pankaj P. Deokar for Respondent no.9
CORAM:
S.V. GANGAPURWALA, ACJ & SANDEEP V. MARNE,J.
DATED :
APRIL 10, 2023 P.C.
Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned counsel for the respective Respondents. The issue pertains to the shortage of water to the various areas within the limits of Pune Municipal Corporation and Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation. This court under Order dated 11.10.2017 under Public Interest Litigation No.36 of 2016 and Public Interest Litigation No.25 of 2016 had passed a detailed order regarding the same grievances. This court had directed constitution of a committee in Pune and Thane districts so that the aggrieved party can approach the committee placing their grievance before the committee which can redress the grievance after taking note of the factual situation and hearing all the parties concerned. The court also observed that it would be advisable to have such committee sitting atleast once in two months. The court was of the opinion that in the respective districts of Pune and 2/4
Thane, if the committee is formed consisting of Divisional Commissioner, Municipal Commissioner, Chief City Engineer of the respective authorities who is in charge of water supply in the local authority along with Member, Secretary of District Legal Services Authority in respective districts, the same would hear once in two months to address the grievance brought on record by the aggrieved parties, so far as deficit water supply or non-supply of water, coming within the jurisdiction of the above two local authorities.
It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Respondent no.6 that such a Committee was constituted. However, it is submitted that the said Committee is not holding any meetings at present. According to the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, only four times, the meetings were held.
Respondent nos.6 and 7 may proceed ahead with the reconstitution of the said Committee as directed under Order dated 11.10.2017 in Public Interest Litigation No.25 of 2016 and Public Interest Litigation No.36 of 2016. The directions given in the said Public Interest Litigation which are applicable to the Pune Municipal Corporation shall also be read as applicable to Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation.
The directions given under judgment dated 11.10.2017 as referred to above shall be complied with by both the Corporations.
3/4
The Respondent no.8 shall also take steps for redressal of grievances of the cities with regard to the distribution of water as and when the same is brought to its notice.
With these observations, the Public Interest Litigation stands disposed of.
Both the Interim Applications also stand disposed of. (SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.) (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) 4/4