Water Property Of State, Not Private Entitlement Of Villagers Who Use It: Himachal Pradesh HC Refuses To Interfere With Construction Of Dam

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has recently observed that it is a misconception that water belongs to the villagers who use the same. Water is the property of the State and no individual has any right to claim this as his property, even though the same might be situated within his personal property, it clarified.

The bench comprising Justices Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Virender Singh made these observations in a plea through the medium of which the petitioners had challenged the construction of proposed dam (bandh) on Bagna nalla somewhere in between villages of Balaog and Bawana near Shimla.

In their plea the petitioners submitted that by the said act of the respondents 90 to 95% inhabitants of Gram Panchayat Dhamoon, will be affected as their very source of livelihood would be snatched. Majority of the inhabitants of these panchayats are unemployed and are, thus, dependent on agriculture, they averred in their petition.

After hearing the contentions raised the bench observed that there cannot be any two opinions that natural resources are the assets of the nation and It is the obligation of all concerned, including the Central and the State Governments, to conserve and not waste such valuable resources.

Highlighting the Constitutional provisions under Article 48A and 51A prescribing the duties of the Sate in matters of environment, the bench siad that the said constitutional provisions, clearly propounded the doctrine of public trust and the said doctrine rests on the principle that certain resources like air, sea, water and forests are of such great importance to the people as a whole that it would be highly unjustifiable to make them a subject of private ownership.

Elaborating further on the matter the bench underscored that the State holds all the water bodies in public trust for the welfare of this generation and all the succeeding generations and, therefore, protecting water bodies must be given as much weightage as haz been given to allowing house-sites or other buildings to come up on such tanks poramboke lands, and water charged lands.

Pointing towards the adequate steps already taken by the respondents to safeguard the interests of the petitioners, the court said that the project in question is being undertaken for the benefit of public at large by maintaining the necessary flow of water in the khud down stream for running of gharat and irrigation channels.

Taking note of the fact that the Gram Panchayat had already passed a resolution im favour of the project and issued no objection certificate in consequences for its construction the bench observed,

"Only four people, that two residents from village Bawana, one each from village Shilru and Panti have filed the instant petition, therefore, the same cannot be termed to be the voice of the people,as the voice of the people would be best reflected if the local rural elected bodies like gram panchayat or gram sabha would come up before the court".

Terming the petition as more of a speculation as the interests of the petitioners have been adequately safeguarded and protected while formulating and implementing the scheme for raising construction of bandh, the bench dismissed the same finding it devoid of any merit.

Case Title: Rajesh Kumar & Ors Vs State of H. P. & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 20

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment