NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

NEW DELHI

 

ORIGINAL PETITION NOs.125 & 126 OF 1994

 

Consumer Education & Research Society & Ors.     …. Complainants

                                 V/s.

Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation & Ors.                 …. Opp. Parties

 

BEFORE :

                   HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.B. SHAH, PRESIDENT

                   HON’BLE MRS. RAJYALAKSHMI RAO, MEMBER

                  

For the Complainant    :         Mr. Vikas Mehta, Advocate

 

For the Opp. Party       :         Mr. H.S. Parihar, Advocate for AMC

                                                Ms. Hemantika Wahi & Ms.Sadhana

Sandhu, Advocates

 

30.04.2008

ORDER

 

 

JUSTICE  M.B. SHAH, J.,  PRESIDENT:

 

 

Law on the subject  on supply of and

getting of   pure  drinking   water:

 

(a) Basic need:

                    The Apex Court in Narmada Bachao Andolan Vs. Union of India, (2000) 10 SCC 64 observed: Water is one element without which life cannot sustain. Therefore, it is to be regarded as one of the primary duties of the Government to ensure availability of water to the people.

                   The Court also held : (para 248)

“Water is the basic need for the survival of human beings and is part of the right to life and human rights as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India and can be served only by providing source of water where there is none. The resolution of UNO in 1977 to which India is a signatory, during the United Nations Water Conference resolved unanimously inter alia as under:

All people, whatever their stage of development and their social and economic conditions, have the right to have access to drinking water in quantum and of a quality equal to their basic needs.                          

(b)  Fundamental right:

                   The right to access to drinking water is a fundamental to life and there is  a duty on the State under Art.21 to provide clean drinking water to its citizens. [re. (2001) 2 SCC 62, pr.3].

 

(c )    Right under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986:

 

                   As per the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Consumer Protection Act and also  Objects of the Consumer Protection Councils,   contemplated under the Act,  a consumer has the right  to be informed about  the quality, quantity, purity of goods including water or services which are rendered by the Statutory Authorities  or in this particular case by the  Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC)  so that it is not hazardous to  life or health.

 

Facts:

 

                   On the basis of the order passed by the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.6740-6741 of 2001,  dated 20th September, 2001 directing this Commission to decide the complaint filed by the Consumer Education & Research Society on merits,   various directions were issued from time to time.   At the outset, we would say that  the Ahmedabad  Municipal Corporation and the State of Gujarat  readily complied with the said directions for the beneft of the residents.

 

                   It is to be stated that those appeals were filed against the order passed by this Commission holding that Consumer Fora had no jurisdiction to decide  such this dispute.

 

                   The complaint is filed by the Consumer Education & Research Society, a voluntary consumer association and the legal heirs of deceased victims of jaundice caused by Hepatitis virus against the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (“AMC”) – Opposite Party No.1  and  the State  Government – Opposite Party No.2.

 

                   It is contended that the cause of action for filing the Complaints arose on account of the jaundice epidemic which occurred in November, 1993 in Ahmedabad which resulted in about 100 deaths and affected over 1200 persons. In fact, according to the State Government, the epidemic affected 1550 persons.   The Complainants’ case is  that the jaundice epidemic occurred because of the contaminated supply of drinking water by the AMC.   AMC is, inter alia,  responsible for supply of water, repair and maintenance of pipelines and drainage facilities, etc. Furthermore, epidemics of water borne diseases were a regular occurrence in Ahmedabad since 15 years prior to 1993.

 

                   In 1988, there was an epidemic of cholera and gastro-enteritis because of contaminated water supply and the Complainant No. 1 filed a Complaint being O.P. No. 29/1989 before this Commission. This  Commission vide Order dated 6.4.1990 held that from the material on record it was not possible to conclude that the epidemic was because of contaminated water supplied by AMC. But the Commission recorded the assurance given by the Advocate General  and passed order dated 6.4.1990 as under :-

“However, since it is of the utmost importance that every step would be taken to ensure to the maximum extent possible that a recurrence of such epidemics does not take place in future in the city of Ahmedabad during the monsoon season, we suggested to the learned Advocate General of Gujarat who appeared on behalf of the Respondents that he should file before this Commission a detailed statement setting out the various measures that are being already taken by the Municipal Corporation as well as the further steps which are proposed to be taken in future to bring about all round improvement of health, hygiene and sanitation in the Municipal Corporation and for elimination of chances of contamination of water supply. Accordingly, a detailed statement has been filed by the learned Advocate General on behalf of the Opposite Party No. 1- the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation… We record the assurance given to us by the learned Advocate General on behalf of the Corporation that the existing measures of sanitation and maintenance of health and hygiene set out therein will be continued uninterrupted in future also and that the further programme of action set out therein for bringing about alround (sic all round) general improvement and modernization of the civic services related to health, sanitation, etc. will be duly and faithfully implemented. In the event of there being failure on the part of the Corporation to duly carry out the said assurance it will be open to the first Petitioner society or any other interested Consumer Association to bring the matter before us for appropriate further orders.

 

          This Commission further gave liberty to the Complainant No.1 to approach the Commission in future if any cause of action arose. It is in this background that when an epidemic occurred in November, 1993 the Complainants approached this Commission by way of  filing the above stated  two Complaints.

 

          The Complainants have relied upon several newspaper cuttings of 1993-1994 which reveal that it was the failure on the part of AMC to maintain drainage lines and  that was the cause of the jaundice epidemic of 1993. The Complainants also produced reports of the Survey conducted by Complainant No. 1 i.e. water samples tested (as per World Health Organization guidelines) at Gujarat Jalseva Training Institute which is a body under the Gujarat Water Supply & Sewerage Board. Out of the 42 samples tested, 14 (constituting 33%) were found to be contaminated. Shockingly, the contamination included human/ animal excreta. Similarly, the Microbiology Department, University of Gujarat also conducted a survey on the bacteriological quality of water in August, 1993 i.e. some time prior to outbreak of the epidemic. It was found that as much as 56% samples were contaminated.

 

Written Version of AMC:

The AMC filed a Reply denying all averments raised in the Complaint and described the various water sources which feed water to the city of Ahmedabad and the distribution system through the pipelines by which the water ultimately reaches the consumers. It was mentioned therein that the rusted private domestic pipelines were the cause for spread of infection. They also mentioned the steps taken by them between November, 1993 and January, 1994 for containing the disease.  They also relied upon the water samples tested by them. Further, they contended that to solve the problem of overflowing of drainage water in eastern part of the city a project had been implemented for the infrastructure which was likely to be completed by December, 1995. Further, a special project aided by the World Bank for the newly merged underdeveloped areas in the city had been undertaken which was to be completed by June 1996.

 

Proceedings before this Commission

          When the matter was listed before this Commission on 25.2.1999, the Commission dismissed the Complaints observing that the same were not consumer disputes but same were in nature of public interest litigation. The Complainants filed an Appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against this Order. The Supreme Court vide Order dated 20.9.2001 set aside the Order dated 25.2.1999 and remanded the matter back to this  Commission for hearing on merits.

 

          Before this Commission, the Complainants produced various newspaper cuttings for the period April, 1997 till 2000 which revealed the various epidemic episodes that had taken place in Ahmedabad because of contaminated water supply.

 

                   Subsequently, the parties led their evidence by way of affidavits. The Complainants proved the averments in their Complaint and also made out a case for the quantum of damages suffered by them on account of death in their families.  In the meanwhile, pursuant to direction of this Commission, the State Government also filed an affidavit in reply dated 28.7.2004 wherein it was inter alia mentioned the action taken by them pursuant to jaundice outbreak of 1993.

 

                   In September, 2005, the Complainants filed M.A. No. 353 of 2005 wherein it was averred that even in early 2005, there was an outbreak of jaundice epidemic in Ahmedabad due to contaminated supply of water by AMC and a large number of persons had been affected.   The Complainants relied upon a newspaper report dated 8.4.2005 showing that the official number of cases had gone up to 500 and AMC had to call experts to conduct epidemiological investigations and suggest remedies. The Complainants also pointed out that in the affidavit in reply dated 28.7.2004 filed by the State Government the Government had mentioned that after the outbreak of 1993, they had got surveys conducted and from which it was inter alia concluded by them  that (i) cases of viral hepatitis were due to contamination of water (ii) virus was resistant to action of chlorination because of which hepatitis cases had increased and (iii) corrective measures of leakages of pipelines were done by AMC. The Complainants sought production of various documents relating to conclusions reached by State Government.

 

Order dated 28.10.2005:

              Considering the above background, this Commission vide Order dated 28.10.2005 directed AMC to file necessary affidavit stating the steps taken by them for verifying whether contaminated water was supplied to the city of Ahmedabad or not and also to produce on record the reports of the samples taken and disclosing the relevant rules for taking water samples and whether such rules were complied with or not.

 

               In compliance with the same, AMC filed an Additional Affidavit dated 4.1.2006 wherein it was mentioned that there were following types of water sources in Ahmedabad i.e. (i) Surface water (River water) (ii) Infiltration and French wells, and (iii) Tube well stations. AMC also mentioned that they were conducting tests on water samples collected from the sources, distribution network and consumer end points. The procedure for collecting water samples was the one laid down in guidelines of World Health Organization (“WHO”). AMC produced the annual reports for the years 1992, 1993 and 1994 for the water samples collected from the source.

 

                    On 20.7.2006, the Complainants filed an Affidavit in reply to the additional affidavit wherein it was mentioned that after the Additional Affidavit dated 4.1.2006 there had been several incidents of jaundice deaths in Ahmedabad. Further, the residents of the walled city area of the Central Zone had made complaints that the water being supplied was yellowish in colour and the Deputy Civil Engineer, Mr. Jainik A. Shah had been quoted in newspaper as saying that the old city has very old water connection lines which caused contamination. This Commission took into account this affidavit and also observed that water tanks in the city of Ahmedabad were not being properly maintained by AMC.

 

Order dated 24.7.2006:

                   Hence, the Commission vide Order dated 24.7.2006 recorded as under :-

 

“Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant has filed an affidavit wherein it has been specifically mentioned that the water which is supplied by the Municipal Corporation contains yellow colour and is muddy. In the previous affidavit complainant has also filed evidence by way of affidavit wherein it is pointed out that water contains bacteria caused by excreta of animal of human.

 

In  this view of the matter, the State Government is directed to file necessary affidavit with regard to the purity of water supplied to the consumers by the Municipal Corporation. Deputy Commissioner, Municipal Corporation would also file an affidavit stating that higher officer of the Municipal Corporation would visit the water tank and see that the tank is properly sealed so that animals are not in a position to enter the tank or pollute the water and also file a fortnightly testing report of the water supplied from the source. Affidavits to be filed on or before 15th September, 2006.”

 

 

Guidelines of W.H.O. for drinking water:

 

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Complainant has filed further affidavit dated 22nd April, 2008 wherein it has been pointed out that as contended by the AMC that it  has been strictly adhering to  the ‘W.H.O. guidelines to drinking water quality’ which are the international reference point for drinking water quality regulation and standard setting. The guidelines are as under :-

 

The WHO Guidelines outline a preventive management “framework for safe drinking-water” that comprises five key components:

·        Health-based targets based on an evaluation of health concerns.

·        System assessment to determine whether the drinking-water supply (from source through treatment to the point of consumption) as a whole can deliver water that meets the health-based targets.

·        Operational monitoring of the control measures in the drinking-water supply that are of particular importance in securing drinking-water safety.

·        Management plans documenting the system assessment and monitoring plans and describing actions to be taken in normal operations and incident conditions, including upgrade and improvement, documentation and communication; and

·        A system of independent surveillance that verifies that the above are operating properly.

 

                   The learned counsel for the Complainants,  therefore, submits that directions should be given to the AMC to comply with the aforesaid guidelines because it is the say of the AMC that it was complying with the WHO guidelines. 

 

                   We accept the aforesaid contention and direct that the AMC shall comply with the said  guidelines of  the W.H.O.

 

                   Further, as stated in the affidavit dated 14.9.2006 filed by the State Government that the AMC shall comply with the recommendations made by the National Institute of Communicable Diseases, Delhi for water quality surveillance and for the water supply network in the city.

 

                   In compliance with Order dated  24.7.2006, AMC filed Second Additional Affidavit dated 12.9.2006 wherein it was mentioned that the Municipal Commissioner had issued Office Order No. 62 of 2006 dated 23.8.2006 for fortnightly inspection of water tanks as directed by this Commission.   Furthermore, the Dy. Municipal Commissioner of all the Zones of the city had been directed to send inspection report along with testing report within 10 days to the City Engineer and the City Engineer would submit the same to the Municipal Commissioner. It was affirmed therein that the Higher Officers of the Municipal Corporation would visit the water tank and see that the same is properly sealed so that animals are not in a position to enter the tank or pollute the water in any manner. It was also mentioned that the testing report of the water supplied from the source would be filed fortnightly to the concerned Dy. Municipal Commissioner of the Zone.

          The State Government also filed affidavit dated 14.9.2006 wherein it was mentioned that the Government through the Health Department was taking steps to control water borne diseases such as Cholera, Diarrhea, Gastroenteritis and Viral Hepatitis with utmost care. It was mentioned that the public authorities and local self governmental bodies had been impressed to ensure that the drinking water is properly chlorinated and the standard of purity laid down by the Gujarat Water Supply Board are maintained at optimum levels in all the seasons.

 

                   Further, the Commissionerate of Health had been issuing guidelines/ directives and warning to Rural and Districts developments, Urban Development Departments, Municipal Corporations (including AMC) and various other Nagarpalikas across the State from time to time and a list of such circulars was also annexed. The Government affirmed that to bring awareness amongst the public, the Government had initiated campaign for “Clean Gujarat, Healthy Gujarat.” As a part of the campaign, the Government provides chlorinating agents like bleaching powder, chlorine tablets and arranges various Health Education Camps for common public. Moreover, various measures were being taken by the Health Department such as medical assistance through physicians, microbiologists, paediatricians and Epidemiologists, etc. and list of various activities and assistance rendered by the Government was annexed. The Government affirmed that the National Institute of Communicable Diseases (NICD), Delhi had visited Ahmedabad and given several recommendations including initiation of water quality surveillance program by AMC, water supply network in the city should be improved by replacing old, coercive and rusted pipes by new galvanized pipes, AMC should take up comprehensive programme to make aware the citizens on water and environmental sanitation. The Government affirmed that the above recommendations had been communicated to AMC and other local bodies for their action plan.

                  

                   The Government stated that all the local bodies had been directed to carry out regular surveys for checking sewer overflow and leakage into water supply system and to attend the same on priority basis and that necessary guidelines in this behalf had been issued to all concerned. Lastly, the Government stated that they were receiving complaints from public and attending to same and list thereof was produced.

 

                   This Commission vide Order dated 21.11.2006 directed publication of the water testing report in local newspaper. The Corporation published the water testing report in the local newspaper and also uploaded the same on its website fortnightly (Kindly see para 9 of affidavit dated 27.3.2008 of AMC).

 

Order dated 27.4.2007

                   This Commission vide Order dated 27.4.2007 recorded as under :-

“Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Municipal Corporation on instructions from Shri P. Patel, Scientist In-Charge states that as per the WHO and ISI standards water is supplied to the city of Ahmedabad. He further states that with regard to the old pipelines in the Central Zone, there is a scheme for changing the same so that no polluted water could be supplied.

As against this, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Complainant submits that no such scheme is known to the public at large. He further contends that if some information is given to the public at large, they would be in a position to point out whether water supplied to them is as per the standard, as contended by the Corporation. He further submits that there is no scheme with the Corporation for giving data with regard to purity of the water supplied to the city.

Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the State Government submitted that with regard to multi-storied buildings owned by the State Government appropriate checks are being carried out on monthly basies with regard to the supply of water to ensure that water tanks are properly cleaned and sealed.

          Adjourned to 29th August, 2007 for directions.”       

(vi)     The Commission thereafter vide Order dated 31.8.2007 recorded as under :-

          “Ld. Counsel for the complainant submitted that as per our last Order dated 27th April 2004 (sic 27th April, 2007), old pipelines in the Central Zone, there is a scheme for changing the same and whether this scheme is being implemented. Ld. Counsel for the opposite party- Shri Parihar seeks some time to file an affidavit regarding the same. Prayer granted.

          Stand over to 23rd November, 2007.”

 

Order dated 22.2.2008:

 

          This  Commission vide Order dated 22.2.2008 recorded as under :-

“The third additional affidavit filed by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) today, is taken on record. Ld. Counsel for AMC states that on the basis of our Order dated 27.4.2007, more than 80% of the water pipelines in the area of central zone have been changed as per the scheme which was contemplated by the Corporation in the year 2005-06. It is further stated that with great zeal, the orders passed by this Commission and the scheme, are implemented scrupulously and strictly and, hence, the matter may be disposed of accordingly.

          As against this, ld. Counsel, Mr. Mehta, for the complainants submitted that AMC has still  not framed appropriate scheme for changing the old pipelines in the entire city. It is their responsibility to see that the old and rusted water pipelines all over the city are changed so that contamination and deaths due to jaundice can be reduced. This has been contended because the AMC took nearly 10 years in changing the pipelines after the epidemic of jaundice.

          For the aforesaid purpose, AMC to file appropriate affidavit. Stand over to 4th March 2008. Dasti in addition.”

The AMC filed Third Additional Affidavit dated 16.2.2008 wherein it was mentioned as under :-

         

“I say that pursuant to the Order passed by this Hon'ble Commission dated 31.8.2007 I have to state that after taking into consideration the Order dated 27.4.2007 and also the scheme for changing old pipe line in the central zones and to comply the Order & implementation of the scheme, corporation has changed rotten/ decomposed and damaged line & thereby secured utmost pure drinking water to the central zone of the city. Annexed hereto & marked as R1 are extracts of statement showing the area of central zone where the pipe line has been changed as per the scheme. It is also respectfully submitted that the frequently and intermittently the concerned  department is supervising the pipeline then immediately the corporation is changing the same. The corporation is also supervising the pipeline periodically to avoid any contamination and taking the remedial steps like washout and flush out and de-silting and curing corrosion from the pipeline.”

 

                    The higher officers of the Corporation are supervising pipelines and changing the same, if required.  They are also supervising the pipelines periodically to avoid any contamination and also take remedial steps like washout and flush out and de-silting and curing corrosion from the pipelines.

 

                   In view of the aforesaid affidavits and orders passed by this Commission nothing is required to be done in this matter except to pass the following order:

(i)      AMC to comply with the affidavits filed  by them from time  to time before this  Commission.

(ii)      The officers of the Municipal Corporation shall comply with the office order 62 dated 23rd August, 2006 for fortnightly inspection of water tanks, as directed by this Commission on 24th July, 2006.

(iii)     The higher officer of the Municipal Corporation would visit the water tank and see that the tank is properly sealed so that animals are not in a position to enter the tank or pollute the water and also file a fortnightly testing report of the water supplied from the source.

(iv)     AMC to adhere to the WHO’s guidelines namely preventive management “framework for safe drinking water” that comprises the following  five key components:

·        Health-based targets based on an evaluation of health concerns.

·        System assessment to determine whether the drinking-water supply (from source through treatment to the point of consumption) as a whole can deliver water that meets the health-based targets.

·        Operational monitoring of the control measures in the drinking-water supply that are of particular importance in securing drinking-water safety.

·        Management plans documenting the system assessment and monitoring plans and describing actions to be taken in normal operations and incident conditions, including upgrade and improvement, documentation and communication; and

·        A system of independent surveillance that verifies that the above are operating properly.

(v)     With regard to each zone, periodical water testing report shall be published in the  newspapers

(v)       Old pipelines shall be periodically checked and   in case the same are rusted/damaged, they  will be replaced.

         

                   State Government would also ensure that the direction issued by this Commission are complied with by the AMC.  It is one of the functions of the State Consumer Protection Council to see that the consumer is informed, inter alia, about the quality, quantity and purity of the water and services rendered by the authority including the AMC and that is not hazardous to life or health. Hence, the State Government shall bear minimum cost which was required to be incurred by the Complainant.

 

                   We appreciate the work rendered by the Complainants.  For this hard work undertaken by the Consumer Education & Research Society, State Government shall pay Rs.50,000/- as costs.  Such work for the benefit of the consumer is required to be encouraged and appreciated  by the State Government.

 

                        However, we make it clear that we are not awarding punitive damages, as contemplated under Section 14(1) (d) of the Consumer Protection

 

Act.

Sd/-

…………………………………..J

(M.B. SHAH)

PRESIDENT

Sd/-

……………………………………

(RAJYALAKSHMI RAO)

MEMBER

P/21(A) & (B)