ORDER :

1. These Contempt Petitions have been filed by Delhi Jal Board against Respondents 1 & 2 for their wilful disobedience of the order dated 29.02.1996 in Contempt Petition Nos. 111 and 113 of 1995 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 537 of 1992 titled Delhi Water Supply and Sewage Disposal Undertaking & Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors., (1996) 2 SCC 572 According to the Petitioner, the direction given by this Court in the said order to release sufficient water to keep the Wazirabad reservoir full has been violated by the Respondents.

2. Mr. Vikas Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, submitted that the Respondents have to maintain a flow of 450 (four hundred and fifty) cusecs into the Wazirabad pond. The maximum capacity of the Twin Mains, which is a pipeline that draws water from the Carrier Lined Channel (CLC), is 370 cusecs. At least 80 (eighty) cusecs of water has to be supplied through the River Yamuna, assuming that the Twin Mains are working at full capacity. Mr. Singh stated that there is a shortfall of 40 cusecs through the Twin Mains and there is no water being supplied through the River Yamuna. He stated that the State of Haryana has excess water available to meet its drinking water and agricultural/ irrigation needs. The supply of drinking water has to be given preference. Upper Yamuna River Board (Board) did not respond favourably to the request made by the Delhi Jal Board for supply of water by the State of Haryana. Having no other alternative, Mr. Vikas Singh submitted that these Contempt Petitions are filed against the Respondents.

3. Mr. Shyam Divan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Respondents, countered the submissions made on behalf of the Delhi Jal Board by stating that this Contempt Petition is an abuse of process of law. Having failed in several attempts to put pressure on the State of Haryana for supply of more water than what was allocated to the State of Delhi, the Petitioner has resorted to this Contempt Petition. He submitted that several changes have taken place after the order was passed by this Court on 29.2.1996 and the directions issued on that date are not applicable to the present-day situation. He asserted that the State of Haryana has been releasing water as per the agreement and directions issued by the Upper Yamuna River Board.

4. Due to shortage of drinking water for the residents in Delhi, Commodore S.D. Sinha filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the State of Haryana to maintain regular flow of water in Yamuna River. An interim order was passed on 31.03.1995 in the said petition which is as follows:

“After hearing the representatives of all the States concerned and the Union of India and their learned counsel, we are of the view that the Board having been legally constituted, the Memorandum of Understanding has become executable under law. The State of Delhi which is in dire need of water is to be given its allocation of water with immediate effect. We, therefore, direct all the parties to the Memorandum of Understanding to assure that sufficient water, which according to Mr. Mathur is about 2½ times of the seasonal allocation, is released from Tajewala Head so that Delhi gets 0.076 BCM [It is this quantity of water, Delhi has to get under the MoU, between March to June.] for its consumption during the period March to June 1995.

We issue special directions to the States of Haryana and Uttar Pradesh through their Chief Secretaries of the Irrigation Departments to release the water as directed by us for the consumption of Delhi from Tajewala Head with effect from 6-4-1995. While passing this order, we take this opportunity to request the respective Chief Ministers of the two States of Haryana and Uttar Pradesh to direct the officers/officials concerned of their respective Governments to have our directions regarding supply of water to Delhi, complied with.

We make it clear that this order is as an interim measure