Back
1999 Supreme(SC) 843
1999(7) Supreme 285
Supreme Court of India
(From Madras High Court)
B.N. Kirpal & S. Rajendra Babu, JJ.
Parambikulam A.P.O.A. Association & Ors. -Appellants
versus
State of Tamil Nadu & Ors. -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 7719 of 1994
Decided on 12-8-1999
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellants : A.K. Ganguli, Sr. Advocate, S. Aravindh & V. Balachandran, Advocates.
For the Respondents : R. Mohan, Sr. Advocate, M.A. Krishnamoorthy, M.A. Chinnaswamy, R. Nedumaran, Advocates.
For the Respondent : M/s. Arputham, Aruna & Co. Advocates (NP).
Headnote:Parambikulam Aliyar Project (Regulation of Water Supply) Act, 1993-Validity of Act-Parambikulam Aliyar Project originally meant to irrigate an area of 2,50,000 acres in Coimbatore District-Water was to be supplied once in a year for irrigation-In 1967 Government order deciding to supply water for irrigation of an additional area of 1,15,000 acres-Writ petition challenging order - Consent order whereby petitioner had no objection to extend project to 1,15,000 acres and Government was to supply sufficient water to original ayacutdars once in 18 months before applying water to new ayacutdars - After 10 year Government passing impugned Act extending project to other draught prone taluks dividing whole area into four zone providing irrigation to each zone once in two years as against existing three zone-Contention that legislature has no power to overrule and set at naught High Court order - Untenable - Order of High Court did not create a vested right in favour of appellant to get water once in 18 months -No mandamus issued to State not to increase area to covered by Project-As a matter of Agrarian reform under changed circumstances new procedure enacted for equitable distribution of water-Valid basis for enactment of impugned Act.
Held : The order of the High Court dated 22nd December, 1983, when read carefully, cannot be construed to mean that a vested right had been created that the appellant would get water once in 18 months. The said order recorded that the appellant would have no objection to additional area of 1,15,000 being covered by the Project or for any further extension provided that existing ayacuts were assured of a supply of water once in 18 months. There was no mandamus issued to the State not to increase the area to be covered by the Project. If there were any increase which resulted in supply of water being given not once in 18 months but at a greater interval then the appellant would have a right to challenge the same. (Para 11)
Further, on the facts as existed in 1983 the order dated 22nd December, 1983 was passed, as a result of which an area of 3,65,000 acres was covered by the Project. Considering the change in the circumstances over a period of ten years, and as a matter of agrarian reform, a new procedure was enacted for more equitable distribution of water. There was a valid basis for the enactment of the impugned Act. We no not see any impediment in the legislature in view of change in circumstances and with the passage of time or otherwise, introducing an Act with a view to provide benefit to larger number of people. Any such enactment cannot be regarded as arbitrary or in any case bad in law. Before concluding we would like to observe that the High Court has also took note of the fact that the appellants have not established any pre-existing right and in any case, even if, that right had been established the State legislature could certainly have altered the same with a view to provide benefit to a larger area and more people. (Paras 12 & 13)
Judgment
The validity of Parambikulam Aliyar Project (Regulation of Water - Supply) Act, 1993 is the subject matter of dispute in this appeal which arises pursuant to a certificate under Article 133 of the Constitution of India having been granted by the High Court of Madras.
2. Briefly stated the facts which are relevant for the disposal of the present appeal are that the members of the petitioner society are agriculturists who are carrying on agricultural operations on lands which are covered in what is called the Parambikulam -Aliyar Project’.
3. The said Project was undertaken with a view to supply water for agricultural operations in some Taluks of Coimbatore District. In 1962 a declaration is stated to have been made by the Tamil Nadu Government’s Policy to the effect that ayacutdars would be supplied water once a year under this project. In 1967 it was represented that an area of 1,40,000 acres under the Project would be irrigated once a year and balance one lakh acres will be irrigated after the completion of Solaiyar and Nirar dams.
4. In 1967 the Tamil Nadu Government issued a Government Order whereby it decided that water be supplied for irrigating an additional area of 1,15,000 acres. This decision was challenged by the appellants by filing Writ Petition Nos. 575 and 1309 of 1978 in the High Court of Madras on 22nd of December, 1983. As a result of agreement between the parties, the writ petitions were disposed of by the following order :
“The learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Pleader agree that the following order could be made and imposed on the parties :
“The petitioner has no objection to the original Ayacut of 250000 acres covered by Parambikulam Aliyar Project being extended by 1,15,000 acres as envisaged by G.O. No. 126 dated 29-1-1976 or for any further extension :
Provided that before applying water to the new ayacutdars in the extended ayacut, the original ayacutdars are first assured of supply of sufficient water, subject to availability once in eighteen months as regularly as possible or practicable.”
There will be an order accordingly in these writ petitions. There will be no order as to costs.”
5. Nearly a decade after the passing of the said order the State of Tamil Nadu enacted the impugned Act. In the preamble it was, inter alia, stated that under Article 48 of the Constitution of India the State is required to endeavour to organise agriculture on modern and scientific lines and at that moment 2,02,152 acres of land were getting water supply from the Project for irrigation on rotational basis by dividing the entire ayacuts into three zones and by supplying water once in 18 months on rotational basis in each year. The preamble also noted by referring to the representation which was received from other proverbial drought prone Taluks who wanted the extension of supply of water under the Project to those Taluks. The impugned Act was enacted with a view to provide irrigation facilities under the said Project by dividing the whole area into four zones, providing irrigation to each zone, once in two years as against the existing three zones. Section 3 of the said Act, which is relevant in the present case, reads as under :
3(1). Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force or in any judgment, decree or order of any court, Tribunal or other authority or any custom, agreement or usage or any rule, notification or order made or issued by the Government relating to inclusion of ayacuts in the Parambikulam - Aliyar Project or supply of water to such ayacuts or parts thereof and in force on the date of publication of this Act in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette, the Government may after consulting the Chief Engineer (Irrigation) or such other officer or authority as they may consider necessary, by notification, regulate on rotational basis in accordance with the rules as may be prescribed, th
