When Most Indians Struggle For Drinking Water, Plea On Quality Of Packaged Water Is 'Luxury Litigation': Supreme Court

Terming the issue as “luxury litigation”, the Supreme Court on Wednesday declined to entertain a plea raising concerns over the alleged failure to follow international standards for packaged drinking water in India, observing that large parts of the country still struggle to access basic drinking water.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was hearing a writ petition filed by Sarang Vaman Yadwadkar, seeking directions on improving standards applicable to packaged drinking water.

At the outset, the CJI questioned the very premise of the petition, remarking, “Where is the drinking water in this country, madam? People do not have drinking water; the quality of bottled water will come later on.”

Senior Advocate Anita Shenoy, appearing for the petitioner, countered that citizens should at least be assured of clean and safe packaged drinking water, stressing that the issue had a direct bearing on public health. She relied on Section 18 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, which mandates authorities to adhere to prescribed safety standards, and argued that statutory obligations could not be diluted.

The Court, however, remained unconvinced. Disagreeing with the submissions, the CJI observed that the plea reflected an “urban-centric approach”, noting that people in rural areas largely depend on groundwater. “This is an urban-centric approach; the people in rural areas drink groundwater, and nothing happens to them,” he remarked.

The Bench further observed that it would have appreciated the petition had it focused on villages where even basic drinking water facilities were unavailable. “Water bottle should have this content, that content. These are all luxury litigations,” the CJI said.

When counsel denied that the petition was a luxury litigation, emphasising its health implications, the CJI reiterated that the plea overlooked the stark ground realities faced by the country. “Do you think we will be able to introduce the USA, Japan, EU guidelines? Let us face the ground realities of the country. Nobody takes up the cause of the poor; all this is rich and urbanised phobia,” he observed.

The petitioner's counsel also highlighted disparities in standards, pointing out that permissible limits under Indian norms were far weaker compared to World Health Organization benchmarks. The Bench, however, was not persuaded to examine the issue judicially at this stage.

Before dismissing the matter, the Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw the plea with liberty to approach the competent authorities. In a parting remark, the CJI said, “When Gandhi came to India, he travelled to all poor parts. Ask the petitioner to travel to the poor parts where there is a challenge even to get water, then he will understand what is India.”

Case details: SARANG VAMAN YADWADKAR Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.| W.P.(C) No. 1222/2025