Observing that every water source in the State is and shall remain the property of the Government, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court on Tuesday dismissed a plea filed by the residents of the village Qasba Yar, District Shopian, seeking directions upon the administration to not to change, divert or take any water from Yari Kohal, a river flowing through their village. The villagers had...
Observing that every water source in the State is and shall remain the property of the Government, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court on Tuesday dismissed a plea filed by the residents of the village Qasba Yar, District Shopian, seeking directions upon the administration to not to change, divert or take any water from Yari Kohal, a river flowing through their village.
The villagers had stated that Yari Kohal is the sole source of irrigation for their agricultural land and the respondents, without any authority or valid reason, had initiated the construction of a diversion of Kohal through the Irrigation Division Shopian. Yari Kohal has limited water supply, which is only enough for the residents of Qasba Yar village, they had argued.
In order to address the controversy the bench of Justice Rajesh Oswal noted that Section 3 of the Jammu and Kashmir Water Resources (Regulation and Management) Act, 2010 clearly prescribes that every water source in the State is property of the Government and any proprietary ownership, riparian or usage right on such water resources vested in any individual, group of individuals or any other body, corporation, company, society or community shall, from the date of commencement of the Act, be deemed to have been terminated and vested with the Government.
Observing that the petitioners have no vested right to demand any particular amount of water, particularly when the respondents have already determined the requirement of different villages, the court held that the action of the respondents for reviving the canal in order to cater to the needs of other villages cannot be termed as illegal, unauthorized and without any justification.
Underscoring the goal of the State in ensuring that the ownership and control of the material resources of the community are distributed to subserve the common good as mandated under Article 39 of the Constitution, the Court said that the respondents have undertaken the exercise to ensure fair distribution of the natural resources and no individual or group of individuals can claim any right to exclusive use of natural resources.
Based on these findings of law the bench found the petition devoid of any merit and dismissed the same.
Case Title: Mohammad Akram Dar & Ors Vs State of J&K.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 135
Click Here To Read/Download Judgement