SC questions KWSB’s policy of hydrants

Karachi
The Supreme Court expressed its displeasure on Wednesday at the management of hydrants by the Karachi Water and Sewerage Board (KWSB), and directed the water utility’s managing director to explain through documents under which arrangement the water supply was being regulated through tankers.
“The water board appears to have been selling water through contractors [tankers’ owners] and they do not have any scheme to serve the interest of the residents of Karachi,” a three- member bench headed by Justice Amir Hani Muslim observed.
“The purpose for creating hydrants was different than the purpose for which the supply of water is being made in Karachi city,” it said.
The court was hearing applications against the illegal operation of hydrants in Karachi. The complainants said hydrants had taken illegal connections by damaging the KWSB’s lines in different areas of the city.
It directed the managing director to justify the increase in the number of water tankers in the recent past when there was a huge hue and cry over a shortage of water in different areas of the city.
The court inquired the officer incharge of the KWSB’s hydrant operation about the mechanism for running the hydrants. He submitted that there were 24 legal hydrants in the city, out of which 21 were operational while the remaining three, one each in Korangi, Lasbela and Ahsanabad, had been made dysfunctional by the managing director due to a shortage of water in the main water lines.
To a court query about the policy under which the hydrants were regulated, he said the hydrants were operated under a standard operating procedure of August 25, 2009.
When the court asked whether water was being supplied to the affected areas by the KWSB or by the water tankers’ owners, the officer could not offer any plausible explanation; however, he placed on record a copy of the contract entered into between the KWSB and the contractors/tanker owners. He said that under the scheme 40 percent of the water was supplied to the public for free, while 60 percent of the water supplied by water tankers on a commercial basis.
After perusal of the terms of the contract, the court observed that prima facie the terms of the contract do not reflect that such contracts were serving the residents of Karachi by providing them the water facility and in fact the KWSB appears to have been selling water through the contractors and they do not have any scheme to serve the interest of the residents of the city.
KWSB Deputy Managing Director Iftikhar Ahmed said the water supply through lines was the only solution to reducing the water crisis; however the water supply through tankers was used when there was a shortage of water in the lines.
Justice Hani observed that the KWSB issued no-objection certificates to multi-storey buildings without any ground check which created problems.
The court directed the officer incharge of hydrants to submit the documents on the basis of which he was regulating the supply of the water through tankers. Besides, he was directed to justify the increase in the number of tankers in the recent heat wave in different areas of the metropolis.
The court directed the KWSB head to produce all material reflecting the policy under which the hydrants were being regulated.
It also told the provincial police chief to instruct the police department to cooperate with the water board and as and when the police officer received a complaint from KWSB officials, the SHO concerned must register a case and apprehend the culprits.
The court observed that in case the SHO failed to take action then he would be proceeded against departmentally.
It also took notice of the non-appearance of the KWSB managing director who had reportedly gone to the Supreme Court for attending the suo moto proceedings regarding the women’s prison on behalf of the ombudsman secretary at the principal seat in Islamabad.
The court asked how the KWSB MD could take over the additional charge of the secretary ombudsman, which was another cadre post.
It was informed that there was no order for personal appearance for the secretary ombudsman in the proceedings.
The court directed the KWSB MD to appear in person with his explanation as to why he failed to appear when there was a specific order for his personal appearance and what made him go to Islamabad in a matter wherein he was not specifically required to appear.
It observed that the expected explanation would be examined and an appropriate order passed.