← Library
Bombay High CourtPIL/62/2016disposedoff

Diwakar S/O. Nanaji Game And Another v. State Of Maharashtra, Dept. Of Irrigation Thr. Principal Secretary, Mumbai And Others

2019-01-10Hon'Ble Shri Justice Ravi K. Deshpande,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Vinay Joshi3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 62/2016.

Diwakar Nanaji Game and another.

-VERSUSState of Maharashtra and others.

Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

Shri A.R. Patil, Advocate for Petitioners.

Shri S.M.Ukey, Addl.G.P. for Respondent Nos.1, 3 to 6. Shri S. Manohar, Senior Advocate with Shri A.A. Naik, Advocate for Respondent No.7.

Shri V.G. Palshikar, Advocate for Respondent No.2. CORAM : R.K. DESHPANDE & VINAY JOSHI, JJ.

DATE : JANUARY 10, 2019.

Heard.

2.

The learned Counsel appearing for V.I.D.C.

and State of Maharashtra, make statement that first priority is for supply of drinking water. In case of any scarcity of water, the supply would not be made available to respondent no.7 Company.

3.

In paragraph no.24 of the reply filed by respondent no.7, it is stated as under :

"24.

It is submitted that the site from where, the answering respondent is permitted to draw water is located at a lower level that then Hinganghat. It is submitted that the direction of the flow of the river thus first provides water to Hinganghat. It is submitted that it is thereafter that the water, if available can be drawn by the answering respondent. It is submitted that Hinganghat is located upstream and as such the utilization of water by the answering respondent who is located downstream would have no effect on the water availability of Hinganghat."

4.

In view of the aforesaid assurances by respondent regarding drinking water from the source in question, we do not find any reason to go into the matter further. The grievances of petitioner stand satisfied.

5.

The assurance given to this Court shall

always remain binding on the respondent. All the parties have agreed to the aforesaid arrangement. Public Interest Litigation is, disposed of accordingly. No costs.

JUDGE JUDGE Rgd.