- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
M.K Balakrishnan (1) And Others v. Union Of India And Others
Factual and Procedural Background
The matter originated as a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeking protection of wetlands for environmental and ecological preservation. Pursuant to an earlier order dated 26-2-2009, the Chief Secretaries of the States of Haryana and Uttar Pradesh appeared personally before the Court; their future personal presence was dispensed with. During the present hearing, the Supreme Court suo motu expanded the petition’s scope to cover all water-conservation bodies—ponds, tanks, canals, creeks, water channels, reservoirs, rivers, streams and lakes—citing the acute national water shortage allegedly exacerbated by encroachment and conversion of such bodies for private construction. The Court noted previous directions issued in State of Orissa v. Govt. of India (2009) 5 SCC 492 addressing broader water-scarcity concerns. It allowed an application for impleadment, ordered issuance of notice to newly added States, and fixed the next date of hearing for 28-4-2009.
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether and to what extent the Supreme Court should issue directions for the conservation and restoration of wetlands and other traditional water-harvesting structures across India.
- What immediate steps the Union of India, through the Ministry of Science and Technology, must undertake to implement the scientific recommendations earlier endorsed by the Court in State of Orissa v. Govt. of India for addressing nationwide water scarcity.
Arguments of the Parties
The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.
Table of Precedents Cited
| Precedent | Rule or Principle Cited For | Application by the Court |
|---|---|---|
| State of Orissa v. Govt. of India (2009) 5 SCC 492; JT (2009) 2 SC 233 | Recommended constitution of an expert scientific body to devise inexpensive methods for water generation and conservation. | The Court reiterated these recommendations and sought a status report from the Ministry of Science and Technology on their implementation. |
| Delhi Water Supply & Sewage Disposal Undertaking v. State of Haryana (1996) 2 SCC 572 | Declared water a “gift of nature” and integral to the right to life under Article 21. | Cited to underscore that denial or depletion of water resources violates fundamental rights. |
| Chameli Singh v. State of U.P. (1996) 2 SCC 549 | Held that the right to life encompasses rights to food, water, and a decent environment. | Used to reinforce the constitutional dimension of water conservation. |
| Hinch Lal Tiwari v. Kamala Devi (2001) 6 SCC 496; AIR 2001 SC 3215 | Emphasised protection of communal resources such as ponds to maintain ecological balance. | Relied upon to advocate restoration of disused or encroached ponds for public benefit. |
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The Court observed a severe nationwide water crisis caused by rampant filling and encroachment of traditional water bodies, leading to depleted rivers and groundwater levels. Drawing on historical practices of rain-water harvesting, the Bench criticised “greedy persons” for converting ponds and tanks into real-estate developments, thereby aggravating water scarcity and social unrest.
Invoking Article 21 jurisprudence, the Court integrated prior rulings that recognise access to water as a facet of the right to life. It specifically relied on:
- Delhi Water Supply for the principle that water is a natural bounty essential to life;
- Chameli Singh for expanding the right to life to include water and a healthy environment;
- Hinch Lal Tiwari for the ecological imperative to preserve communal water resources; and
- State of Orissa for the need to mobilise scientific expertise on a “war-footing.”
On that foundation, the Court determined that effective conservation requires governmental accountability and scientific intervention. Consequently, it directed the Secretary, Ministry of Science and Technology, to file a counter-affidavit within four weeks detailing measures already undertaken or proposed to resolve water shortage and to implement the earlier scientific recommendations.
Holding and Implications
ORDER: Notice issued to the Secretary, Ministry of Science and Technology, Union of India, to file a comprehensive counter-affidavit within four weeks; application for impleadment allowed; notices issued to newly added States; matter listed on 28-4-2009.
Implications: The order imposes immediate accountability on the Union Government to articulate concrete scientific and administrative steps for water conservation. While no final rights are adjudicated, the decision broadens the ongoing litigation’s scope and reinforces prior constitutional recognition of the right to water, potentially guiding future environmental governance without yet setting conclusive precedent.
Order
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Pursuant to this Court's order dated 26-2-2009, the Chief Secretaries, State of Haryana and Uttar Pradesh are personally present in the Court. Their personal presence is dispensed with unless directed in future.
2. The present writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India relates to conservation of wetlands which in our opinion would include ponds, tanks, canals, creeks, water channels, reservoirs, rivers, streams and lakes. Although, the writ petition as framed related to protection of wetlands in the country for preservation of the environment and maintaining the ecology, we have suo motu expanded its scope as mentioned below.
3. There is acute shortage of water in our country and one of the main reasons for that is that most of the water conservation bodies in our country such as ponds, tanks, small lakes, etc. have been filled up in recent times by some greedy persons and such persons have constructed buildings, shops, etc. on the same.
4. Our ancestors were wise people who realised that because of droughts or some other reasons there may be shortage of water in future and hence they made the provision of a pond near every village, tanks in or near temples, etc. which were the traditional rainwater harvesting methods. The whole idea behind this was that whenever there is a shortage of water due to drought, etc., people may not suffer and they may use the water available in ponds, tanks, etc.
5. Unfortunately, people have forgotten the wisdom of our ancestors and that is why some greedy people for their personal interest and to make money have filled up most of these ponds, tanks, etc. and have constructed buildings thereon with the result that in most parts of India, there is a terrible water shortage and people are suffering terribly, particularly, in the summer season both in rural and urban areas. When water is not available, people come to the streets and there are chakka jams (road blocks), riots, etc. to awaken the government authorities to take some measures to make available the necessity of life to the general public called water. In many cities, in many colonies, people get water for half an hour in a day and sometimes not even that e.g in Delhi, Tamil Nadu, Rajasthan, U.P, north-east, etc. In large parts of rural areas there is a shortage of water for irrigation and drinking purpose.
6. Rivers in India are drying up, groundwater is being rapidly depleted and canals are polluted. Yamuna in Delhi looks like a black drain. Several perennial rivers like Ganga and Brahmaputra are rapidly becoming seasonal. Rivers are dying or declining, and aquifers are getting overpumped. Industries, hotels, etc. are pumping out groundwater at an alarming rate, causing sharp decline in the groundwater levels. Farmers are having a hard time finding groundwater for their crops e.g in Punjab. In many places there are serpentine queues of exhausted housewives waiting for hours to fill their buckets of water. In this connection, John Briscoe has authored a detailed World Bank Report, in which he has mentioned that despite this alarming situation there is widespread complacency on the part of the authorities in India.
7. This Court in State of Orissa v. Govt. of India (2009) 5 SCC 492, JT (2009) 2 SC 233, in which one of us (Hon'ble Markandey Katju, J.) was a member, while agreeing fully with the reasoning and directions of the other Hon'ble Judge on the Bench Hon'ble Altamas Kabir, J., has recommended to the Central Government to immediately constitute a body of eminent scientists in the field who should be requested to do scientific research in this area on a war footing to find out scientific ways and means of solving the water shortage problem in the country. It was also recommended that the said body shall be given all the financial, technical and administrative help by the Central and State Governments for this purpose. The help and advice of foreign scientific experts and/or Indian scientists settled abroad who are specialised in this field may also be taken, since the solution to the problem will not only help India but also foreign countries which are facing the same problem, some of which may already have progressed significantly in this area. The present known methods e.g distillation or reverse osmosis are very expensive. We have to find out cheaper methods and this is possible only by scientific research on a war footing.
8. In State of Orissa case (2009) 5 SCC 492, JT (2009) 2 SC 233 the said body of scientists was requested to, inter alia, perform the following tasks:
(i) to find out an inexpensive method or methods of converting saline water into fresh water.
(ii) to find out an inexpensive and practical method of utilising the water, which is in the form of ice, in the Himalayas.
(iii) to find out a viable method of utilising rainwater.
(iv) to utilise the flood water by harnessing the rivers so that the excess water in the floods, may instead of causing damage, be utilised for the people who are short of water, or be stored in reservoirs for use when there is drought.
9. In the said decision State of Orissa (2009) 5 SCC 492, JT (2009) 2 SC 233 the Court also observed:
“62. It is indeed sad that a country like India which solved the problem of town planning 6000 years ago in the Indus Valley Civilisation and which discovered the decimal system in Mathematics and plastic surgery in medicine in ancient times, and is largely managing Silicon Valley in USA today has been unable to solve the problem of water shortage till now. In my opinion there is no dearth of eminent scientists in the field who can solve this problem, but they have not been organised and brought together and not been requested by the Central and State Governments to solve this problem, nor given the facilities for this.
63. In my opinion the right to get water is a part of right to life guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution. In this connection, it has been observed in Delhi Water Supply & Sewage Disposal Undertaking v. State of Haryana (1996) 2 SCC 572, JT (1996) 6 SC 107:
‘1. Water is a gift of nature. Human hand cannot be permitted to convert this bounty into a curse, an oppression. The primary use to which water is put being drinking, it would be mocking nature to force the people who live on the bank of a river to remain thirsty,…’
64. Similarly in Chameli Singh v. State of U.P (1996) 2 SCC 549, JT (1995) 9 SC 380 this Court observed:
‘8. … Right to live guaranteed in any civilised society implies the right to food, water, decent environment, education, medical care and shelter. These are basic human rights known to any civilised society. All civil, political, social and cultural rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Convention or under the Constitution of India cannot be exercised without these basic human rights.’ ”
(emphasis in original)
10. In Hinch Lal Tiwari v. Kamala Devi (2001) 6 SCC 496, AIR 2001 SC 3215 this Court observed:
“13. It is important to notice that the material resources of the community like forests, tanks, ponds, hillock, mountain, etc. are nature's bounty. They maintain delicate ecological balance. They need to be protected for a proper and healthy environment which enables people to enjoy a quality life which is the essence of the guaranteed right under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Government, including the Revenue Authorities i.e Respondents 11 to 13, having noticed that a pond is falling in disuse, should have bestowed their attention to develop the same which would, on one hand, have prevented ecological disaster and on the other provided better environment for the benefit of the public at large. Such vigil is the best protection against knavish attempts to seek allotment in non-abadi sites.
14. For the aforementioned reasons, we set aside the order of the High Court, restore the order of the Additional Collector dated 25-2-1999 confirmed by the Commissioner on 12-3-1999. Consequently, Respondents 1 to 10 shall vacate the land, which was allotted to them, within six months from today. They will, however, be permitted to take away the material of the houses which they have constructed on the said land. If Respondents 1 to 10 do not vacate the land within the said period the official respondents i.e Respondents 11 to 13 shall demolish the construction and get possession of the said land in accordance with law. The State including Respondents 11 to 13 shall restore the pond, develop and maintain the same as a recreational spot which will undoubtedly be in the best interest of the villagers. Further it will also help in maintaining ecological balance and protecting the environment in regard to which this Court has repeatedly expressed its concern. Such measures must begin at the grassroot level if they were to become the nation's pride.”
11. Let notice be issued to the Secretary, Ministry of Science and Technology, Union of India which will file its counter-affidavit within four weeks stating what measures are being taken to solve the water shortage problem in the country and for implementing the recommendation of Hon'ble Markandey Katju, J. in the aforesaid decision in State of Orissa v. Govt. of India (2009) 5 SCC 492, JT (2009) 2 SC 233.
12. The application for impleadment is allowed. Let notice be issued to the newly added States. List this matter on 28-4-2009.
Alert