Last Updated:
CJI Surykant News: While hearing the petition filed by the Supreme Court regarding the quality of bottled water, CJI Surykant has made strict remarks. He rejected this petition and called it a luxury case. CJI Surya Kant said that even today people in many parts of the country do not get basic drinking water. In such a situation, the debate on international standards of bottled water reflects urban thinking.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court’s strict comment on the petition filed regarding the quality of bottled water in India has sparked a big debate. The country’s top court said in clear words that when crores of people still do not have access to even basic drinking water, then the demand for international standards of bottled water seems like a luxury suit. With this thinking in mind, the court rejected this petition. During the hearing, Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant made strong remarks.
What was the petition?
According to Live Law, this writ petition was filed by Sarang Vaman. It was demanded that international standards should be ensured for packaged drinking water in India and strict guidelines should be given regarding quality. The argument of the petition was that bottled water is a directly related health issue of the people.
The writ petition was filed by Sarang Vaman.
Why did the court reject the petition?
The bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymala Bagchi rejected the petition saying that it is disconnected from the ground reality of the country. The CJI said that when clean drinking water is not available to a large population, then spending the court’s time on the quality of bottled water cannot be a priority.
‘This is urban thinking’
Senior advocate Anita Shenoy, on behalf of the petitioner, argued that people should at least get safe bottled water. He cited Section 18 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. But the CJI disagreed with this argument and said, ‘This shows urban thinking. In rural areas, people drink ground water and nothing happens to them.
question of village vs city
The court clarified that if the petition had focused on those people who still do not get drinking water, especially in rural India, then the court would have appreciated it. The CJI said that such petitions divert attention from the real problems and it would not be wrong to call them ‘luxury cases’.
Rejecting the petition, CJI Surya Kant asked, when there is no drinking water in the villages, then why the luxury debate? (File photo)
What does this decision mean?
The Supreme Court’s comments are not limited to just one petition. This is a big message on the country’s water policy, priorities and urban-rural inequality. The court made it clear that until the basic needs are met, the debate about facilities is secondary.
