JUDGMENT : R. SUBHASH REDDY, J. This writ-petition is filed by way of Public Interest Litigation, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking directions by issuing a writ, directing the respondent authorities to release water from Meshwo Canal to fill up the pond of village Bherai as early as possible. 2. In the petition, it is stated that the petitioners are agriculturists having agricultural land in village Bherai, as they are seeking directions in the interest of farmers of village Bherai, as such, it is stated that it involves public interest also. It is the allegation of the petitioners that there is 700 vighas of agricultural land which is being irrigated by drawing water from the pond of village Bherai and normally, in the month of November/December, on the demand of village people water is released from Meshwo Irrigation Canal to fill up the pond of village Bherai and from such water the land of 700 vighas is being cultivated. It is alleged in the petition that this year also, there was a request. from the Sarpanchas of villages Bherai to the Deputy Executive Engineer, Meshwo Irrigation Project, situated at Bareja, vide letters dated 15.11.2016 and 16.11.2016, for release of water to fill up the village pond. 3. Principally, it is the grievance of the petitioners that in spite of availability of water in Meshwo Canal, only to protect the persons who have illegally cultivated the land in the pond of village Bherai the respondents are not releasing the water. Reference is also made in the writ-petition to the letter dated 19.12.2016 of the respondent no. 3-Deputy Collector, Kheda and it is stated that the petitioners have reliably learnt that by the said letter, the Deputy Collector, Kheda has requested the respondent no. 2 to ensure filling up of water for the pond of village Bherai, in spite of the same, the respondents have not acted upon. It is pleaded that earlier also, it was the practice prevailing of releasing the water in the month of November/December to fill up the pond of village Bherai, but this year, in spite of the availability of water, the respondents are not taking steps to release the water to fill up the pond of village Bherai. In view of the same, it is alleged that the petitioners and other villagers are deprived of irrigation of their land. 4. In view of the same, it is alleged that the petitioners and other villagers are deprived of irrigation of their land. 4. Further affidavit is also filed by the petitioners stating that the concerned authorities are raising a plea that pollution of water is the reason for not filling up the pond of village Bherai to protect the lands of the village. It is stated that the same is not the real reason for not filling up the pond of the village. It is further stated in the further affidavit that the same water which is alleged to be polluted is being supplied to other villages for irrigation purpose, such as Navagam, Pinglaj, Govindpura, Nayaka, Kanera, Kashipura and also part of village Bherai through sub-canals which are locally referred to as “Open Kansh” It is further stated that the very same water is being used in the aforesaid villages for irrigation and such practice was in vogue to release the water for the last more than 20 years and the same is being continued at the present also. 5. Affidavit in reply is filed on behalf of 3rd respondent, i.e Deputy Executive Engineer, Meshwo Irrigation Sub Division. In the reply affidavit, while denying various allegations made by the petitioners, it is stated that Bherai village lake is under the Command Area of Khari Sluice system and the tail ends of Meshwo main Canal meets to Khari river near Bidaj village, wherein the water of Khari river is contaminated because of nearby Industrial Zone, i.e. Vatva G.I.D.C It is further stated in the reply affidavit that generally in monsoon season when large quantum of rainy water is available in Khari river, it decreases the quantity of the contaminated water in the river and at that time, Bherai tank fills with less contaminated water and that water is used by the people for irrigation purpose during Kharif season, and therefore, it is not correct to say that every year the water is released from Meshwo Canal before rainy season for filling the Bherai tank. With reference to the allegation of the petitioners that the same contaminated water is being supplied to the villages such as Navagam, Pinglaj, Govindpura, Nayaka, Kanera, Kashipura etc. With reference to the allegation of the petitioners that the same contaminated water is being supplied to the villages such as Navagam, Pinglaj, Govindpura, Nayaka, Kanera, Kashipura etc. and also part of Bherai village through sub-canals, it is stated that the villagers of the above villages take water on their own with the help of irrigation pumps and the authorities have never stored such contaminated water in the villages referred above. At the same time, it is stated that if Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat of this village is ready to pass resolution and take all the responsibility, the respondent authorities are prepared to take steps to release the water for storage in Bherai tank. Further, by referring to the report dated 17th January 2017, which is submitted by the respondent no. 3 to the Chief Engineer (Central Gujarat) and to Joint Secretary, Water Resources, Water Supply and Kalpsar Department, it is stated that the said authorities were also apprised of the factual aspects by pointing out that the water is highly chemical concentrated and harmful for any activities. It is further stated in the said report that if any villager is in urgent requirement of water, in such cases, to help such villagers, the authorities provide water to small ponds from which the villagers can draw water by pump in stead of filling large tank of Bherai village. 6. We have heard the learned counsel Shri H.L Patel for the petitioners and Shri Dhawan M. Jayswal, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent authorities. By referring to the pleadings on record and other material documents which are in the nature of communications, it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that though the lands of the petitioners are within the command area of Khari Sluice system, in spite of the same, the petitioners and other villagers of the village are deprived of the irrigation of their lands by the respondents by not releasing water to fill the pond of village Bherai. It is submitted that only because there is encroachment by some persons in the pond of village Bherai, to protect such encroachers water is not being released to fill the village pond under the guise of chemical concentration and pollution of water. It is submitted that only because there is encroachment by some persons in the pond of village Bherai, to protect such encroachers water is not being released to fill the village pond under the guise of chemical concentration and pollution of water. By pointing out the stand of the respondents in the reply affidavit that in some other villages small ponds are filled with the same water which is ultimately being used for cultivation by the villagers by lifting water, it is submitted that there is no reason or justification for discriminating the petitioners and villagers of the village Bherai for not releasing the water to irrigate their lands. 7. On the other hand, it is contended by the learned Assistant Government Pleader that there was no practice of releasing water for growing crop in the past as pleaded. It is submitted that only during the monsoon season, water was released from Meshwo Canal wherein contamination is diluted in view of the rains, as such, presently, water is chemically contaminated and the same is not released. It is further submitted that in some villages, small ponds are filled on the request of agriculturists but such agriculturists on their own are using the water from small pond by drift irrigation and the same is the reason not to fill up the large tank of village Bherai. Learned Assistant Government Pleader further submits that the allegation of the petitioners that only because of encroachment by some persons by way of cultivation in the village pond the respondents are not releasing the water, is incorrect and not substantiated by any material. 8. From the pleadings and the submissions made by the learned counsel on both the sides, it is clear that the land in village Bherai which is being irrigated by drawing water from the pond is within the command area of Khari sluice system and the tail ends of Meshwo main Canal meets to Khari river near Bidaj village. From the statements made in the reply affidavit, it appears that only because the water of Khari river is contaminated in view of the nearby Vatva GIDC, the respondents are not releasing the water to fill up the pond of village Bherai. From the statements made in the reply affidavit, it appears that only because the water of Khari river is contaminated in view of the nearby Vatva GIDC, the respondents are not releasing the water to fill up the pond of village Bherai. At the same time, it is not in dispute that small ponds are filled in other villages such as Navagam, Pinglaj, Govindpura, Nayaka, Kanera, Kashipura and the very same water is being used by them by drawing the water for irrigating their lands. If such water is used for irrigable purpose by such villagers, the same cannot be the sole reason for not filling the pond of village Bherai. 9. It is to be noticed that whether water should be released or not is primarily the function of the respondents and in such matters normally, this Court is slow in issuing directions for release of water. However, in view of the submission that similarly placed villages are taking steps to fill the small ponds, which in turn is being used for irrigation of the land of such villagers, the relief sought by the petitioners deserves consideration by giving appropriate directions. Furthermore, it is specifically pleaded by the petitioners that only to protect the encroachers of the village pond the respondents are not taking steps for release of water and the allegation of contamination of water is only pretext for not releasing the water. Though learned counsel placed on record the communication to support his submission that there is encroachment of the village pond, but it is not possible to determine and decide whether encroachers are there or not unless full-fledged inquiry is conducted for the same. 10. Having regard to the aforesaid findings recorded as referred above, in stead of granting prayers as sought by the petitioners, we deem it appropriate that the matter requires attention of the higher authorities concerned. 10. Having regard to the aforesaid findings recorded as referred above, in stead of granting prayers as sought by the petitioners, we deem it appropriate that the matter requires attention of the higher authorities concerned. As it is stated that the Superintending Engineer, Mahi Irrigation Circle, Nadiad is the concerned authority, we direct the Superintending Engineer, Mahi Irrigation Circle, Nadiad, to inspect the land of the pond of village Bherai within a period of one week from the date of receipt of this order and to decide within a period of two weeks thereafter whether it is in the interest of the petitioners and other villagers of village Bherai to accede to the request of the petitioners for release of water to the pond of village Bherai. It is open to the Superintending Engineer, Mahi Irrigation Circle, Nadiad to look into the alleged encroachments in the pond of village Bherai as alleged by the petitioners. The Superintending Engineer to take decision for release of water independently. On inspection of the village pond, if the Superintending Engineer finds that there are large-scale encroachments in the pond in question, he shall issue appropriate directions to the concerned authorities for taking steps for removal of encroachments and to see that at no point of time such village pond is encroached for raising crops or for any other purpose. It is also made clear that on inspection if crops on the land of pond are found to be in advanced stage of harvesting, such crops shall not be destroyed, however, steps shall be taken for removal of encroachment after existing crops are harvested. 11. The petitioners to approach the respondent and produce copy of this order before the Superintending Engineer, Mahi Irrigation Circle, Nadiad and the Superintending Engineer to inform the petitioners in advance before inspecting the pond in question. 12. Though the Superintending Engineer, Mahi Irrigation Circle, Nadiad is not party respondent in this petition, copy of this order be marked to him. 13. Subject to the above observations and directions, this writ-petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs.