Judgment : 1. This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the impugned order dated 23-7-2007 passed by the respondent-2, in file No. RA No.22/06-07, vide Annexure-A and also quash the endorsement dated 27-1-2007, issued by the respondent-3, vide Annexure-B and etc.. The petitioner in this writ petition is seeking writ of certiorari for quashing Annexure-A the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Shimoga District, affirming the order passed by the third respondent rejecting the request of the petitioner for sinking borewell in his land. 2. Petitioner is the owner is possession of the properties bearing Sy.No.16/1P1 measuring 33 guntas and Sy.No.16/2A measuring 25 guntas situated at Nadamanchale Village, Sagar Taluk. There is an open well in Sy.NO.16/1P1 and it is the only water source for cultivation of his land. He has grown areca nut gardens which requires more water during summer season. The Open well has no sufficient water. Therefore, he decided to dig borewell for the purpose of irrigating his areca nut garden. His Case is that the Government Tank is situated at Sy.No.13 and a water source is situated in Sy.No.18, 2,500 ft. away from the petitioner's land. The petitioner's lands are situated on the upper portion of the tank and water source. If the borewell is dug in the petitioner's land, it will not affect the water tank in any way and the petitioner is not using or drawing the water from the aforesaid source. The petitioner contends that the tank situated in Sy.No.13 and the alleged water source is situated in Sy.No.18 are not declared as public source of drinking water area by issuing any notification as required under Section 7 of the Karnataka Ground Water (Regulation for Protection of Sources of Drinking Water) Act, 1999, for short, hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'. Therefore, the authorities cannot prohibit the petitioner from digging a borewell in his land for agricultural purposes. There are no Government drinking water wells or ponds situated surrounding the land of the petitioner. When the petitioner started digging the borewell, the third respondent issued a notice calling upon him not to dig the borewell without prior permission and it was followed by an order prohibiting him from digging the borewell. The said order was challenged by the petitioner before this Court in W.P.No.27500/05. When the petitioner started digging the borewell, the third respondent issued a notice calling upon him not to dig the borewell without prior permission and it was followed by an order prohibiting him from digging the borewell. The said order was challenged by the petitioner before this Court in W.P.No.27500/05. The said writ petition came to be dismissed on the ground that the petitioner has an alternative remedy under Section 14 of the said Act. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred an appeal. The second respondent after hearing the parties partly allowed the appeal and set aside the order passed by the third respondent and directed the petitioner to approach the second respondent for permission to dig the borewell. The said order was challenged again by way of writ petition in W.P.No.5637/06 before this Court. This Court disposed of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to place all the materials before the competent authority to show that digging of the borewell will not affect the source of drinking water to the public at large and further directed the competent authority to consider the application filed by the petitioner within a period of two months. Accordingly, the petitioner filed an application seeking permission to dig borewell in his land. An inspection was conducted, mahazar was drawn and thereafter, permission sought for was rejected as per Annexure-B. The petitioner preferred an appeal challenging the said order, which came to be dismissed as per Annexure-A. Therefore, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition before this Court. 3. The Villagers who had participated in the proceedings therein were not made parties to this writ petition. Therefore, they have filed impleading application. The same was allowed. 4. The State has filed its statement of objections contending that in Sy.No.13, a Government tank is situated and the water source of the said tank, i.e., water spring is situated in Sy.No.18 of Nadmanchale Village of Sagar Taluk. The said tank as well as the water spring are at a distance of 207 meters and 150 meters, respectively from the petitioner's land, where he desires to dig borewell for the irrigation purpose and not a distance of 2500 ft. away from the said tank and water spring. The said tank as well as the water spring are at a distance of 207 meters and 150 meters, respectively from the petitioner's land, where he desires to dig borewell for the irrigation purpose and not a distance of 2500 ft. away from the said tank and water spring. The aforesaid two sources of water are existing since long period and water from the tank is used by the socially backward people who are residing at the distance of 300 meters from the tank. Since the water is used by the nearby locality people for a long period and the said drinking water source is existing from long time, there is no necessity to declare the same as 'public sources of drinking water' under Section 2(7) of the Act. As per Section 3(1) of the Act, no person shall without obtaining permission from the appropriate authority sink any well for the purpose of extracting or drawing water within 500 meters of public source of drinking water. On such application being made, the authorities having found that the borewell which is to be dug is at a distance of 150 meters from the tank and 207 meters from the water spring, the same came to be rejected. Therefore, the action of the respondent cannot be found fault with. 5. Sri. Jaykumar S. Patil, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner assailing the impugned action of the respondents contended that in the first place, the two sources of water at Sy.No.18 and Sy.No.13 are not notified as public source of drinking water. Therefore, the question of petitioner applying for permission and the authorities granting permission would not arise. Secondly, he contended that even if it is to be construed as a public water source found in the Government land or the local authority, unless those authorities supply water from the said sources to the public, it would not constitute a public source of drinking water and therefore, Section 3 is not attracted. Therefore, he submits that authorities have misdirected themselves and the impugned order passed is illegal. 6. Per Contra, the learned Government Advocate submitted that though the said two Survey Numbers are not declared as notified public source of drinking water, those source are in existence prior to the commencement of the Act. Therefore, he submits that authorities have misdirected themselves and the impugned order passed is illegal. 6. Per Contra, the learned Government Advocate submitted that though the said two Survey Numbers are not declared as notified public source of drinking water, those source are in existence prior to the commencement of the Act. It is within the Government land and therefore, it constitutes public source of drinking water even in the absence of notification and the authorities were justified in rejecting the application of the petitioners seeking permission to dig the borewell within the prohibited area. 7. In order to appreciate these rival contentions, it is necessary to have a look at the scheme and various provisions of the Act. 8. The Government of India had circulated a model Bill for regulation of extraction of Ground Water in the year 1990-91. The Central Government has since then repeatedly urging the State Government to pass appropriate legislation to introduce regulatory measures to protect sources of drinking water in rural areas. It is in pursuance of the aforesaid policy, the Karnataka legislature passed the Karnataka Ground Water (Regulation for Protection of Sources of Drinking Water) Act, 1999, for short hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'. It came into force from 27th Day of October, 2003, the day on which it was published in the gazette notification. The object with which this Act was passed was to provide several regulatory measures. One such measure being sinking the Well for the purpose of extracting or drawing water within a distance of 500 meters beyond the public drinking water source without obtaining permission of the appropriate authority. The authority is also vested with the powers to declare the area to be 'water scarcity area' for such period as may be specified in the order or by an order restrict or prohibit extraction for any purpose where such Well is within the distance of 500 meters of the public source of drinking water. The authority is authorised to declare a watershed area as over exploited watershed and prohibit sinking wells in over exploited watershed. Therefore, in order to regulate the exploitation of ground water for the protection of public source of drinking water, this Act is enacted. 9. The definition clause defines the meaning of ground water. The authority is authorised to declare a watershed area as over exploited watershed and prohibit sinking wells in over exploited watershed. Therefore, in order to regulate the exploitation of ground water for the protection of public source of drinking water, this Act is enacted. 9. The definition clause defines the meaning of ground water. 'Ground water' means water existing in an aquifer below the surface of the ground at any particular location regardless of the geological structure in which it is stationary or moving and includes all ground water reservoirs. Drinking water purpose has been defined to mean consumption or use of water by human population for drinking and for other domestic purpose and includes consumption of water for similar such relevant purposes for live stock. The explanation to domestic purposes shall include consumption or use of water for cooking, bathing, washing, cleansing and other day-to-day activities. Similarly, Well, as public source of drinking water, public water supply systems, water scarcity area and water shed are also defined. 10. Section 3 of the Act deals with permission to sink well. No person shall without obtaining permission from the appropriate authority under sub-section (3), sink any well for purpose of extracting or drawing water within five hundred meters of public source of drinking water. Sub-section (2) provides for filing of an application. It provides that any person desirous of obtaining permission under this section shall make an application to the appropriate authority in such form and accompanied by such fees as may be prescribed. Sub-section (3) states that the appropriate authority may, on advice of the Technical Officer, and having regard to the interest of the general public to have the supply of requisite quantity of water for the purpose of drinking water from the public sources and for reasons to be recorded in writing grant permission for sinking of well or reject the application. It is open to the authorities to impose such conditions and instructions while granting such permission. 11. It is in this background, it was contended that unless the Government of India by notification declared a place as public source of drinking water, the question of a person seeking permission to sink the borewell would not arise. It is in this context, it is necessary to see what a public source of drinking water means, as defined under Section 2(7) of the Act. It is in this context, it is necessary to see what a public source of drinking water means, as defined under Section 2(7) of the Act. It reads as under: "2(7) - "Public source of drinking water" means a well from which the Government or a local authority or such authority as Government may by notification specify, provides water to the public and includes such point or any other drinking water sources as may be notified by appropriate Authority." 12. As can be seen from the aforesaid definition, the legislature has consciously adopted both the words 'means' as well as the word 'includes' in the said definition. The definition of a word in the definition section may either be restrictive of its ordinary meaning or it may be extensive of the same. When a word is defined to 'mean' such and such, the definition is prima facie restrictive and exhaustive, whereas, where the word defined is declared to 'include' such and such, the definition is prima facie extensive. Further, a definition may be in the form of 'means and includes', where again the definition is exhaustive; on the other hand, if a word is defined 'to apply to and include', the definition is understood as extensive. The word 'include' is very generally used in interpretation clauses in order to enlarge the meaning of words or phrases occurring in the body of the statute; and when it is so used those words or phrases must be construed as comprehending, not only such things, as they signify according to their natural import, but also those things which the interpretation clause declares that they shall include. When a word is defined to bear a number of inclusive meanings, the sense in which the word is used in a particular provision must be ascertained from the context of the scheme of the Act, the language of the provision and the object intended to be served thereby. It is obvious that the words used in an inclusive definition denote extension and cannot be treated as restricted in any sense. So the legislature has consciously used the word ‘includes' in this definition with the intention to cover all possible public source of drinking water in public interest. 13. It is obvious that the words used in an inclusive definition denote extension and cannot be treated as restricted in any sense. So the legislature has consciously used the word ‘includes' in this definition with the intention to cover all possible public source of drinking water in public interest. 13. In this background, if we look into the definition, it says, public source of drinking water means, a well from which the Government or local authority or such authority as the Government may by notification specify, provides water to the public. The word 'Well' is also defined under Section 2(14) as under: "Well" means a well sunk for the search or extraction of ground water by a person or persons except by the authorised officials of the State or Central Governments for carrying out scientific investigations exploration, development augmentation, conservation, protection, or management works and shall include open well, dug well, borewell, dug-cum-borewell, tubewell, filter points, collector well and infiltration gallery or any of their combinations or variations." 14. Therefore in deciding a public source of drinking water, vis-à-vis Well, apart from what the definition clause contained in clause 2(14) provides, nothing else can be added. It is exhaustive. It has to be strictly construed. If such a Well is situated within the Government land, or a local authority or within the premises of the said authority or the Government by notification specify and water is provided to the public from such Well, it is the public source of drinking water. The restrictive definition of public source of drinking water ends here. 15. The further definition which is the inclusive one starts thereafter. It includes such point or other drinking water source, as may be notified by appropriate authority. If the intention of the legislature was to confine the meaning of public source of drinking to only to such point or any other drinking water as may be notified by appropriate Authority, there was no necessity to use the word "includes", after using the word "means" in the beginning of the definition clause. When the word "includes" is used after using the word "means" in the same definition clause, the intention is obvious. It denotes extension and cannot be treated as restricted in any sense. It is used to enlarge the meaning of the phrase, "Public Source of Drinking Water". When the word "includes" is used after using the word "means" in the same definition clause, the intention is obvious. It denotes extension and cannot be treated as restricted in any sense. It is used to enlarge the meaning of the phrase, "Public Source of Drinking Water". The only way to give effect to such an intention of the legislature is by reading the words "SUCH POINT", independent of ANY OTHER DRINKING WATER SOURCE, and confining the requirement of notification by appropriate authority to the later part of the phrase. That would enlarge the meaning of the "Public Source of Drinking Water" to include such point or any other source as may be notified by the appropriate authority. Therefore, "such point" which can be treated as public source of drinking water do not require any notification. Only if a particular source of drinking water do not fall within the definition of the word 'Well' or 'such point', but still the Government has been given the power to declare any other drinking water source, i.e., other than the Well, as well as 'such point', as the drinking water source. That is the intention of the legislative in using the word "includes" in the said portion of the definition. 16. It is in this background we have to understand the meaning of a public source of drinking water which is defined in Section 2(7) of the Act. The aforesaid Section sets out what are the water sources which could be construed as public source of drinking water. The same could be classified as under:- a) A well from which the Government provides water to the public. b) A well from which a local authority provides water to the public. c) A well from which such authority as the Government may, by notification specify provides water to the public. d) Such point which provides water to the public. e) Any other drinking water source which do not fall within the category referred to at clauses (a) to (c) supra which may be notified by appropriate authority which provides water to the public. 17. Therefore, the laws provides for three categories of public source of drinking water, (1) The Well, (2) such point, (3) other drinking water source. Only in respect of other drinking water source, notification from the Government is required. 18. 17. Therefore, the laws provides for three categories of public source of drinking water, (1) The Well, (2) such point, (3) other drinking water source. Only in respect of other drinking water source, notification from the Government is required. 18. Therefore, it is clear if there is a natural spring which provides water to the public, such point need not be notified by the appropriate authority to constitute the same as public source of drinking water. Such point is a public source of drinking water within the definition clause. What is to be notified as a drinking water source is not a well or such point that is mentioned in clause 2(7) as public source of drinking water, but a source other than the said well or such point. Then by virtue of such notification "such other drinking water source" would become a public source of drinking water. Therefore, if there is a natural spring or a point which provides water to the public, it need not be notified to make it a public source of drinking water. 19. Therefore, in the instant case admittedly there is a water spring situated in Sy.No.18 of Nadamanchale Village of Sagar Taluk. The said spring is at a distance of 207 meters and 115 meters from the petitioner's land where they desire to dig borewell for the irrigation purpose. The said water spring is in existence since long period. The said water from the spring is used by the people nearby for long period. In fact the said water is used by the socially backward people who are residing at a distance of 300 meters from the said spring. The said spring is a public source of drinking water. It is no necessary that any notification has to be issued declaring the said point, where the spring exists, and providing water to the public to make it a public source of drinking water. Therefore, if any person wants to dig a borewell within the 500 meters from the said spring permission under Section 3 of the Act, to sink well is necessarily required. The petitioners intend to sink a borewell which is within 500 meters of such spring-public source of drinking water and, therefore, without obtaining the permission from the appropriate authority under sub-section (3) of Section 3 they cannot sink a well. The petitioners intend to sink a borewell which is within 500 meters of such spring-public source of drinking water and, therefore, without obtaining the permission from the appropriate authority under sub-section (3) of Section 3 they cannot sink a well. The contention of the petitioners that Section 3 of the Act has no application and they need not seek any such permission as the said spring-such point which provides water to the public is not notified as public source of drinking water is without any substance. Therefore, the impugned endorsement issued by the authorities is legal and valid and do not call for any interference. There is no merit in this petition. Accordingly, the petition is liable to be dismissed. Hence, I pass the following order:- (a) Writ Petition is dismissed. (b) No costs.