As Supreme Court finds government cool to its ‘recommendations’, a rigorous ‘direction’ follows to make water available to people. But the Court's over reliance on science mars what could have otherwise been termed as historic judgement.
On Feb 19 this year, the Apex Court had ‘recommended’ immediate constitution of a committee to look for scientific solution to water scarcity. On April 26, it ‘ordered’ the government to do that and came out clear targets and time-frames while deciding a different case. Apex court gets louder and tougher as water crisis management fails to its expectations.
The ‘recommendation’ had come while a two judge division Bench was deciding on a writ petition filed by Government of Orissa that sought Court’s directive to the Central Government to constitute a ‘Water Dispute Tribunal’ to try disputes between Orissa and Andhra Pradesh over Vansadhara River water. The Court allowed the petition and ordered the Central Government to constitute a Tribunal ‘within six months’. But in addition to that the Court also held that water scarcity has become so immense that a Tribunal or a Court of Law cannot permanently find a solution to that. In that back drop, Justice Markandeya Katju in a separate concurrent judgment held that the Government is duty-bound to provide water to people. “The right to get water is a part of the right to life guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution,” opined Justice Katju. He was scathing as people everywhere in India are facing a lot of hardship for shortage of water. We don’t have problem of water. Its situation like ‘water water everywhere but not a drop to drink’, had said the Court. We have huge glaciers in the north, majestic oceans on the rest of three sides and numerous big and small rivers all across. Even then we are facing acute water shortage. This is a problem that Science can and should solve, thought the Court. “India has a strong heritage of science… The way out therefore for our nation is to once again turn to the scientific path shown by our ancestors - the path of Aryabhatta and Brahmagupta, Sushrut and Charak, Ramanujan and Raman,” advised the Court. The Court said that our scientists have the capacities. “There is no dearth of eminent scientists in the field who can solve this problem, but they have not been organized and brought together and not been requested by the Central and State Governments to do their patriotic and sacred duty to solve this problem, nor given the facilities for this,” opined the Court.
In that context the Supreme Court had ‘suggest’ constitution of a committee to look into ‘scientific solution’ to water problems on a ‘war-footing’. It had also advised the Central and State governments to give the committee all kinds of support, including financial, material and administrative support. On that count the Court had passed a detailed order, on March 26, ‘relating to the problem of water shortage in our country and we had issued notice to the Secretary, Ministry of Science & Technology asking him to file a counter affidavit within four weeks stating what measures have been taken to solve the water problem in the country and for implementing the recommendations’ given by the Court.
On April 26, the Supreme Court found the counter affidavits spineless and directed “the Central government to forthwith constitute a Committee to address the problems referred to in our order dated 26th March, 2009 which shall do scientific research on a war footing for solving the water shortage”. The Court was very categorical and pointed in its intention this time. “The Central Government is directed to form this Committee to address the water shortage problem at the earliest, latest within two months from today. This Committee shall have the Secretary, Union Ministry of Science & Technology as its Chairman. Amongst the members of the Committee will be the Secretary, Union Ministry of Water Management. The other members of the Committee will be scientists specialized in the field of solving water shortage problems nominated by the Chairman of the Committee and they are requested to take help from foreign scientists specialized in this field,” ordered the Court.
In order to ensure that the government does not take this lightly, the Court proposed to monitor the progress of the committee regularly. “This matter will be listed on the second Tuesday possibly of every alternative month. List again on the 11th August, 2009, on which date a progress report will be submitted before us by the Chairman of the Committee who is requested to be personally present before us. Thereafter the case will be listed on the 20th October, 2009 and so on,” said the Court.
It’s all fine… but is the Court totally right in reposing faith only in Science to deal with water crisis?
There is no second opinion on the Court’s observation on water shortage and deprivation faced by large number of people or on its ruling that right to water is enshrined in the Constitution of the country. But there can be a level of discomfort when the judgment became a little more obsessed with use and capacities of ‘science’. “It is science alone which can solve this problem,” opined the Court. Definitely, there will be a lot less concurrence of opinion on this.
The Court observed that science had taken ancient India to great heights. But then it attributes the causes of decay of water resources to neglect of science. “However, we subsequently took to the unscientific path of superstitions and empty rituals, which has led us to disaster,” observed the Court.
We cannot say that this was a very sound observation by the Court. The Court did not mention what it means by ‘rituals’ or ‘superstitions’. But if referring to ‘River’ as mother is termed as ‘superstition’ or doing something in good stead like taking bath in ‘holy’ water, or cremating besides a river is considered as ‘empty rituals’ then a lot of eye-brows are sure to rise. On the contrary, science has deteriorated water quality and quantity to great extent whether by polluting the sources or causing changes in climate which has a direct bearing on water or emptying ground water sources or tempering with natural flows of water. Thus, your lordship, please pardon us as we differ with you with the believe that not ‘empty rituals’ or ‘superstitions’ but artificial use of science and technology for use of water has led to its abuse and the present decay of water sources.
Truly, answer lies in our tradition – But which is more simpler, cost-effective and proven
Science does not possess a magic wound – at least not yet - to heal all ailments related to water shortages within a timeframe as the Court expects. The Court hopes that scientific activities - like (a) converting saline water into fresh water; and (b) Scientific research to find out methods of harnessing and managing monsoon rain water and also to manage the flood waters and also to do research in rain water harvesting, and treatment of waste water so that it may be recycled and available as potable water - if done in a war footing will solve water problems. That is quite true. But for that to succeed, we must first have to put seize on the factors that cause direct degradation of water and of the environment that impacts water.
If India was very rich in science, it was no less rich in harnessing its natural resources – including water. Every village and every town in India had its own tradition of water harvesting and use. Modern science has treated such tradition and knowledge with disdain and we are paying the price of that.
So your honour, why go for complex and costlier science when we have simpler, cost-effective and proven technology - in traditional design, knowledge and practice with us?? We thank you for the urgency that you have instilled. We hope that the government too picks that sentiments and start urgently. But for all’s shake - honuorable lordship – please do not think that ‘only science can solve this problem’. Most certainly we have better options available in our tradition to harness our water sources with respect and reap benefits.
