JUDGMENT : [Shaji P. Chaly, J.] 1. Petitioners are the sitting ward members of the Aluva Municipality. The first petitioner is the ward member of Ward No.21, the 2nd petitioner is the member of Ward No.25 and the 3rd petitioner is the member of Ward No.10 in Aluva Municipality. Respondent Nos.6 to 19 are the residents of Aluva Municipality, having properties in the Aluva Municipality and they allow water to be extracted illegally by the operators of drinking water for commercial purposes. According to the petitioners, large amounts of water are daily pumped out from their wells and the same is distributed in large quantities for providing water to the large commercial buildings such as Malls, Hospitals, High rise buildings, in and around Ernakulam. They also cater water to large ships, which call on the Cochin Port. According to the petitioners, the groundwater is depleting day by day and thereby, the locals are facing acute water shortage. Hence, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition, seeking to stop the illegal extraction of the groundwater, thereby exploiting mother nature, and also contending that the locals are in the receiving end for the greed of a group of people who are really a Mafia like group. 2. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Director, Ground Water Department, Jalavijnana Bhavan, Ambalamedu, Thiruvananthapuram - 4th respondent, respondent, is reproduced hereunder : “2. It is submitted that the District Office, Groundwater Department, Ernakulam has conducted an inspection during the month of March, 2018 at 12 locations in and around Aluva Municipality as per the instruction of the District Collector & Chairman, Disaster Management Authority, Ernakulam based on the complaint of the petitioner, Councilor, Ward XXI, Aluva Municipality and Aluva Taluk Powravakasa Samrakshana Samithi and report submitted to Disaster Management Authority. The inspection was carried out at 12 locations, and the open wells in these locations have total depth ranges from 7m to 11.35 bgl and the static water level ranges from 5.25m to 9.82m bgl. During inspection it has been noted that in these locations, groundwater is abstracted from open wells and brought through tanker lorries. For this purpose 1HP to 3 HP motor and pipes are found fitted in these locations. In some locations water supply through tanker lorries are also noted. 3. During inspection it has been noted that in these locations, groundwater is abstracted from open wells and brought through tanker lorries. For this purpose 1HP to 3 HP motor and pipes are found fitted in these locations. In some locations water supply through tanker lorries are also noted. 3. It is submitted that, the District Office, Groundwater, Department, Ernakulam has conducted an inspection in and around Aluva Municipality and the activities which are detrimental to the level of the groundwater in the area, has been reported to the District Collector. The Collector has taken necessary action to stop the pumping of groundwater from the concerned wells. 4. All the open wells with large pumping motors are situated in the riverine alluvium and hence large quantities of water can be extracted. As per the water level data available in the department, the long term water level trend of the observation well at Aluva shows a declining trend. Continuous large-scale pumping from the bank of the river may affect the base flow of groundwater and in due course it will affect the surface water availability of the river. 5. It is submitted that, Groundwater Department had conducted a water level data fluctuation study in the flood affected areas of Ernakulam District. The analysis of the post flood water level data from 63 observation wells of Groundwater Department, Ernakulam showed a decline in water level in most of the wells for a temporary period due to the lack of permeability of the clay rich soil formed as a result of flood and the acceleration of the base flow caused by the flash flood. In course of time and as part of the hydrological processes, the original condition of the aquifer regained. In the post-flood period a lowering of water level was observed in Aluva also. 6. It is submitted that inspection has been conducted in the Municipal area by this office as per the complaint of Sri. A.C. Santhosh Kumar, Councilor, Aluva Municipality. The sandy alluvial formation on the banks of the Periyar river is the major water bearing formation in this area and forms a potential phreatic aquifer. Out of the wells inspected, pumping a few wells directly affects the neighbouring wells of the residents and some institutions. The matter was reported to the District Collector and pumping from these wells were stopped by the District Collector. 7. Out of the wells inspected, pumping a few wells directly affects the neighbouring wells of the residents and some institutions. The matter was reported to the District Collector and pumping from these wells were stopped by the District Collector. 7. It is as per the report prepared by this office, the District Collector has banned the illegal extraction of groundwater from the concerned open wells in the Aluva Municipality. As per Section 5(h) of the Guidelines/Criteria for evaluation of proposals/requests for groundwater abstraction in Kerala issued by the State Ground Water Authority, “Sale and Supply of raw unprocessed/untreated groundwater by unauthorized agencies for commercial use is not permitted. All blocks except Parakkadavu block in Ernakulam District are safe as per the GEC report 2017. For the extraction of groundwater for industrial purposes, the NOC of the State Ground Water Authority is mandatory even in the safe blocks of the State. For evaluating the groundwater extraction for industrial and infrastructure projects, certain guidelines are prescribed by the State Ground Water Authority and as per the guidelines, extraction of raw groundwater for commercial purposes is not allowed.” 3. Counter affidavit is also filed by the party respondents viz., respondent Nos. 7, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18 & 19, which is reproduced hereunder: “2. ...The writ petition is filed with ulterior motives and there is no public interest involved. In the guise of public interest, the writ petitioners are taking this Court for a ride to wreak vengeance on us. The writ petitioners who are local leaders of a political party were continuously pressurizing these respondents for giving illegal gratifications for taking water from our wells which activity is not causing any difficulties to anybody or prohibited by any law. 3. It is submitted that Tanker lorry owners are taking water from the pumping station of Kerala Water Authority, strictly in compliance with the directions issued by the District Collector and the Local self Government Department. These directions are enumerated in Exhibit P2 Notice. 4. But occasionally when there is a shortage of water supply by the Kerala Water Authority, we allow the tanker lorry owners to take water from our wells. But immediately, the Municipality issued notices for stopping it and we accordingly stopped it. Thereafter never water was taken from the wells for sale. These directions are enumerated in Exhibit P2 Notice. 4. But occasionally when there is a shortage of water supply by the Kerala Water Authority, we allow the tanker lorry owners to take water from our wells. But immediately, the Municipality issued notices for stopping it and we accordingly stopped it. Thereafter never water was taken from the wells for sale. As a matter of fact the petitioners are interested in collecting water by tanker lorry owners from our wells, so that they can put us under pressure. 5. Drawing of water from our wells is not causing any disturbance or difficulties to anybody. Taking water from an open well will not affect the groundwater level. As long as river Periyar is flowing as such, there will not be scarcity for water in open wells. The contentions to the contra are absolutely false. 6. It is humbly submitted that the open wells are age old. Before the establishment of domestic water pipeline connections by the Kerala Water Authority, these wells were the source of drinking water. But after widely laying pipelines, practically nobody within the limit of Municipality is depending on open wells. 7. The activity of collection and transportation of water is not a trade included in the list of businesses which requires a licence from the Local Self Government Department. True copy of the letter dated 18/2/2017 issued to me by the 5th respondent is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R7(a). True English Translation of Exhibit RHa) is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R7(b).” 4. A counter affidavit is also filed by one among the party respondents viz., Ibrahim P.K., Kangarapadi, Aluva - respondent No.6, refuting the averments and contentions raised by the petitioners in the writ petition, which is reproduced hereunder: “3. It is submitted that the answering respondent had a facility to collect water at Pulinchuvadu in Aluva. The said facility has obtained a registration Certificate from the Commissionerate of Food Safety, Government of Kerala under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. A true copy of which is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R5(a). It is submitted that Exhibit R6(a) is valid till 2.7.2024. 4. The 6th respondent has installed a Reverse Osmosis (RO) plant at the facility to process and filter the water from well before filling the tanker lorries which are exclusively used for transporting and distributing drinking water. A true copy of which is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R5(a). It is submitted that Exhibit R6(a) is valid till 2.7.2024. 4. The 6th respondent has installed a Reverse Osmosis (RO) plant at the facility to process and filter the water from well before filling the tanker lorries which are exclusively used for transporting and distributing drinking water. It is submitted that this Respondent herein never supplies water directly from the source and only treated drinking water is supplied. The water that was extracted from Pulinchuvadu was being distributed to various public institutions within Kochi Municipal Corporation, limits like hospitals, government offices, naval base, and so on. 5. Since the water was being distributed within the Kochi Municipal Corporation limits the tanker lorries owned by the 6th respondent strictly follow the guidelines prescribed and are registered as drinking water tanker lorries. 6. It is submitted that the maximum price at which the drinking water can be distributed is fixed by the District Collector and the Kerala Water Authority. The 6th Respondent is strictly adhering to the rates prescribed by the authorities. 7. It is further submitted that the Petitioners herein along with police came to the 6th Respondent's facility sometime in October 2018 and directed to stop the supply of water since the present case is pending before this Hon'ble Court. The lorries of the 6th Respondent were also seized by the Police and were released later. In view of this incident, the 6th Respondent has stopped taking water from his facility at Pulinchuvadu. 8. Averments in Paragraph 1 of the Writ Petition are a matter of record and warrants no reply. 9. It is submitted that the existing facilities provided by Kerala Water Authority are grossly inadequate to meet the demands of various institutions and establishments within the Kochi Municipal Corporation limits. The water supplied by persons like the 6th respondent ensures that these institutions and establishments of public importance are being run smoothly. It is submitted that this Court vide judgment dated 14-3-2008 in WP(C) No: 19868 of 2006 observed that “... besides business interest of the sixth respondent, his business is a service to the society in as much as he is supplying drinking water to various organisations in the City. It is submitted that this Court vide judgment dated 14-3-2008 in WP(C) No: 19868 of 2006 observed that “... besides business interest of the sixth respondent, his business is a service to the society in as much as he is supplying drinking water to various organisations in the City. In fact this Court felt that businesses of this nature should be encouraged to promote public interest as drinking water is scarce and public distribution system is inadequate to meet the growing demand of the people ...” A true copy of judgment of this Hon'ble Court dated 14-3-2008 in WP (C) No 19868 of 2006 is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R6(b.”) 10. It is further submitted that lowering of water level alleged by the petitioners is not the result of extraction of water by the 6th respondent but a temporary phenomenon subsequent to the unprecedented floods in the year 2018. The allegation that the people in the locality are facing scarcity of water is false and hence denied 11. It is submitted that when the 6th respondent approached different Municipal Authorities in the district for issuance of license, even the application was not received by them stating that there is no provision for grant of trade license. Similarly, this Respondent approached the State Ground Water Department for issuance of license and was informed that there is no provision for issuance of license to distribute drinking water through tanker lorries. It is submitted that the Respondent herein is agreeable to take license/registration and abide by it's conditions if any if Respondent authorities are willing to receive and consider the Respondent's application for the same. 12. The allegation that now nobody takes water from the pumping station of the water authority is not correct and hence denied. It is submitted that the Respondent herein is now primarily collecting water from the Kerala Water Authority and only the deficit requirement is collected from other sources. The quantity of water that the Respondent herein is alleged to have collected is wrong and grossly exaggerated. In any case the water collected is only distributed to those in the city limits who are unable to get their daily demand of water from the Kerala Water Authority. The quantity of water that the Respondent herein is alleged to have collected is wrong and grossly exaggerated. In any case the water collected is only distributed to those in the city limits who are unable to get their daily demand of water from the Kerala Water Authority. 13.The allegations in the grounds that respondents in the Writ Petition are illegally exploiting mother nature and are powerful and act like mafia and will physically intimidate anyone who raises a question against them is absolutely false and hence denied. It is submitted that this Respondent is a law-abiding citizen and has no intention to indulge in any illegal activities. The averment that drawing of water will result in contamination of water from the sewage system to percolate into the water level and thereby cause contamination of water resources is false and hence denied. The argument that extraction of water is done straight from the well which is against the rules is false and hence denied. This Respondent is distributing only treated drinking water. 14. It is submitted that this Respondent is in the business of supplying water only because the Respondent Authorities and in particular the Kerala Water Authority is unable to meet the water demands of various institutions like hospitals, government offices, malls and residential complexes/colonies in Ernakulam. It is submitted that the supply of drinking water by this Respondent is in the public interest. It is reiterated that this Respondent is not extracting drinking water from its facility in Pulinchuvadu since the institution of the present writ petition. 15. It is submitted that the Petitioners have not made any valid grounds for interference by this Hon'ble Court. It is submitted that the petitioners have not approached this Court with clean hands and the instant writ petition is filed with ulterior motives.” 5. As per the directions of this Court vide Order dated 6th October, 2021, the District Collector, Ernakulam – the 2nd respondent, has filed a statement denying the allegations and averments contained in the writ petition except those that are specifically admitted in the statement, which is reproduced hereunder: “3. This Hon'ble Court on 06.10.2021 passed an Interim Order directing the 2nd respondent District Collector to furnish following details: “13. District Collector, Ernakulam, respondent No.2, is directed to furnish details of the number of persons who had illegally extracted groundwater from the concerned open wells in Aluva Municipality. This Hon'ble Court on 06.10.2021 passed an Interim Order directing the 2nd respondent District Collector to furnish following details: “13. District Collector, Ernakulam, respondent No.2, is directed to furnish details of the number of persons who had illegally extracted groundwater from the concerned open wells in Aluva Municipality. 14. District Collector, Ernakulam, respondent No.2, is directed to furnish the details of the action taken against those who had unauthorizedly extracted water without due registration and without following the norms. 15. District Collector, Respondent No.2, is directed to furnish details as to when ban of extraction was imposed. 16. District Collector, Ernakulam, respondent No.2 is directed to furnish the monitoring mechanism in place. 17. District Collector, Ernakulam is further directed to ensure that there should not be any repetition of illegal extraction of groundwater in Ernakulam District, more so, from the open wells in Aluva Municipality". 4. In compliance to the above direction of the Hon'ble Court, the following details are submitted herewith: Para13 Details of the number of persons who had illegally extracted ground water from the concerned open wells in Aluva Municipality. 7 Para 14 & 15 Details of the action taken against of the party respondents those who had unauthorisedly extracted water without due registration and without following the norms and Details as to when ban of extraction was imposed by the 2nd respondent – District Collector, Ernakulam. Unauthorised Extraction of the party respondents was banned by the 2nd respondent as per Proceedings No. D2- 116346/17 Dated 21.03.2018 & 28.03.2018 (proceedings attached as Annexure A & B Para 16 Monitoring mechanism in place by the 2nd respondent District Collector, Ernakulam Respondent has taken all the steps to stop the pumping of ground water from the concerned wells and constituted the squad in order to strictly observe in this regard. (proceedings attached as Annexure C) It is submitted that, the 2nd respondent has issued strict direction to the concerned in this regard curtaining illegal extraction of Ground water by the party respondents and all entities who operate the ground water transportation in and around Aluva Municipality. It is submitted that based on the report of the District Officer, Ground Water Department, 2nd respondent banned the extraction of Ground Water in Aluva Municipal Limit. The true copy of the Order No.D2-116346/2017 dated 21.03.2018 is produced herewith and marked as Annexure R2(a). It is submitted that based on the report of the District Officer, Ground Water Department, 2nd respondent banned the extraction of Ground Water in Aluva Municipal Limit. The true copy of the Order No.D2-116346/2017 dated 21.03.2018 is produced herewith and marked as Annexure R2(a). Subsequently other two extractions were also noticed by the authority and consequently the illegal extraction of ground Water from that well was also banned. A true copy of the Order No.D2-116346/2017 dated 28.03.2018 is produced herewith and marked Annexure R2(b). It is submitted that for finding out the illegal extraction of Ground Water the 2nd respondent constituted a squad in order to monitor and strictly to observe the illegal extraction of ground water from the area.” 6. The Director, Groundwater Department, Thiruvananthapuram - 4th respondent, has filed an additional counter affidavit and along with the same, guidelines issued by the State Ground Water Authority and the notification issued by the Government of India dated 24th September, 2020, in regard to the guidelines for the management of groundwater and other documents are produced. 7. We have heard learned counsel for petitioner Sri.Rajkumar K.R., learned Senior Government Pleader Sri.K.P.Harish, learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala Water Authority Sri.Benjamin Paul, learned counsel Shri.Thomas P. Kuruvila & Sri.T.A.Unnikrishnan for party respondents and perused the pleadings and material on record. 8. On a perusal of the counter affidavit filed by the respective parties respondents , it is evident that consequent to the interference of the District Administration, the party respondents have stopped drawing of water from the wells within the limits of the Aluva Municipality. Therefore, the directions as sought for by the petitioners to the District Administration and Municipal Authorities, may not be required, due to the development that have taken place during the pendency of the writ petition. However, the subject issue is an important aspect to be looked into by the State Government, the District Administration and the local bodies, in order to ensure stoppage of the extraction of groundwater , drinking water etc. in an unregulated manner by the commercial water supply establishments. Therefore we deem it fit to consider the issue in-depth so as to give an insight to the authorities in order to protect the environment, and also to avoid scarcity of water for the basic necessities not only of mankind but all the living species and the flora and fauna on earth. 9. Therefore we deem it fit to consider the issue in-depth so as to give an insight to the authorities in order to protect the environment, and also to avoid scarcity of water for the basic necessities not only of mankind but all the living species and the flora and fauna on earth. 9. It is relevant to note that the Kerala State Government have introduced Kerala Ground Water (Control and Regulations) Act, 2002, hereinafter called, “Act, 2002”, and amended periodically, with the intention of conservation of groundwater and for the regulation and control of its extraction and use in the State of Kerala, which has come into force on and w.e.f. first day of August, 2002. The “groundwater” is defined in section 2(c) thereunder to mean, “the water which exists below the surface of the ground at any location or at any particular category of location”. Section 2(f) defines “pumping well” to mean, “a well fitted with pump driven by an electric motor or oil engine for pumping water but, does not include open wells fitted with pumps driven by engine or motor of Horse Power upto 1.5 and tube wells, bore wells and dug-cum-bore wells fitted with pumps driven by engine or motor of Horse Power upto 3”, “digging” is defined under section 2(g) which includes digging or drilling of new wells, putting in pipes or drilling, making tunnels or increasing depth or diameter of the existing wells.” “user of groundwater” is defined under 2(h) to mean, “any person using groundwater from a pumping well for any purpose including domestic purpose”, and “well” is defined under section 2(i) to mean, “any structure made on the surface of earth by any person other than officers authorised by the State Government or Central Government, for the purpose of drawing groundwater for search, development, use or management, of groundwater resources and includes open well, dug well, bore well, dug-cum bore well, tube well, storage well, infiltration gallery, but shall not include open well or dug well used for domestic purposes.” 10. The Act, 2002 provides for the constitution of a groundwater authority, grant of permit to extract and use groundwater, registration of existing wells of the notified area, registration of users of groundwater, protection of public drinking water sources etc. The Act, 2002 provides for the constitution of a groundwater authority, grant of permit to extract and use groundwater, registration of existing wells of the notified area, registration of users of groundwater, protection of public drinking water sources etc. One thing important to note in the Act, 2002 is that the registration of the existing wells need to be done only of the notified area, which specifies that every owner of the existing wells of the notified area in the State shall, within a period of one hundred and twenty days from the date of constitution of the Authority, register the wells existing and in use and shall apply to the Authority in such form and in such manner as may be prescribed for a certificate of registration. 11. The Authority is vested with powers to receive application after the cut off date, if sufficient reasons are assigned. The Authority is duty bound to take into account various aspects before granting registration or rejecting the application for registration of well under sub-section (3) of section 8 of Act, 2002. Sub-section (5) shows that the Authority, shall take into account, (a) the purpose for which the water is used; the other existing users of the locality; the rate of re-charge of the area of influence of the well; the quality of groundwater in the location; the long term nature of water level of well; and other relevant factors. It may be true that the registration is required only in a notified area. However, the Authority under the Act, 2002 is duty bound to identify the situations in respect of the availability of groundwater and if required, it needs to be extended to such areas facing acute shortage consequent to drawal of groundwater by commercial establishments for the purpose of conducting and expanding their business operations. 12. This we have said for the reason that section 15 empowers the Groundwater Authority to do various aspects including to conduct inspections in order to identify the availability of groundwater and for other imperative actions in violation of the provisions of the Act, 2002. Clause (k) to section 15(1) confers an omnibus power to the Authorities to exercise such other powers that may be necessary for the implementation of the objects of the Act, 2002 or the Rules made thereunder. Clause (k) to section 15(1) confers an omnibus power to the Authorities to exercise such other powers that may be necessary for the implementation of the objects of the Act, 2002 or the Rules made thereunder. The Authority is also vested with powers under sub-section (2) thereto to perform such functions as may be assigned by the Government from time to time in order to translate the objectives of the Act. 13. We are also of the view that the Act, 2002 is a self contained statute empowering the Authority to take appropriate and suitable action in order to prevent the misuse of groundwater by any person and to take prosecution to ensure that the provisions of the Act, are implemented strictly to attain the objectives of the Act. 14. The Kerala Ground Water (Control & Regulation) Rules, 2004, hereinafter called, “Rules, 2004”, was introduced by virtue of the powers conferred under section 27(1) of Act, 2002 in order to implement the provisions of the Act. In our view, there are sufficient safeguards provided under the Act, 2002 and the Rules thereto for ensuring, controlling and regulating the extraction of groundwater. However, we doubt, the State Government as well as the statutory authority prescribed under the Act, 2002 is taking any action to implement the intention of the provisions of Act, 2002 and the rules thereto in its letter and spirit. 15. It is also equally important to note that the State Ground Water Authority constituted as per section 3 of Act, 2002 has issued guidelines w.e.f. 15.4.2018, for evaluation of proposals/requests for groundwater abstraction in the State of Kerala. The said guidelines has various facets in order to grant permission for construction of wells for drinking and domestic purposes, declaring notified areas, permission for individual households, and other than individual households. Clause 3 of the guidelines deals with non-notified areas, which specifies that, permission for the construction of groundwater abstraction, structures and NOC for withdrawal of groundwater in the non-notified areas, will be considered for industries/infrastructure/mining projects as per the criteria prescribed under clause 3.1 and 3.1.1, which read thus : Safe Major and medium industries to recycle and refuse at least 30% of the waste water NOC is required for groundwater withdrawal subject to adoption of artificial recharge to groundwater Semi-critical Major and medium industries to recycle and refuse at least 40% of the waste water. Withdrawal may be permitted subject to undertaking of groundwater recharge measures. The withdrawal should not exceed 200% of the recharged quantity. Critical Major and medium industries should fully recycle and refuse at least 75% of the waste water. Withdrawal may be permitted subject to undertaking of groundwater recharge measures. The withdrawal should not exceed 100% of the recharged quantity. Over-exploited All industries to fully recycle and reuse the waste water. Withdrawal may be permitted subject to undertaking of groundwater recharge measures. The withdrawal should not exceed 50% of the recharged quantity. 16. The said guidelines also deals with water intensive industries, infrastructure projects, mining and dewatering projects, change in land use etc. taking into account various aspects including the Coastal Regulation Zone Rules, Building Rules and other regulations in vogue. Apart from the same, the Government of India, Ministry of Jalsakthi (Department of Water Resources), River Development and Ganga Rejuvenation, has issued a notification dated 24th September, 2020, apparently on the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its order dated 10th December, 1996 in Civil Writ Petition No.4677/1985 (N.C. Mehta v. Union of India) and in exercise of the powers under section 5 of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 for the purpose of regulating and controlling the groundwater management and development and to exercise certain powers and perform certain functions relating thereto. 17. It specifically deals with the legislations made by the State Governments and issued regulatory directions and orders for regulating groundwater development and management. Various other aspects are also dealt with thereunder. The said notification deals with various situations in regard to the NOC, registration of drilling rigs, drinking and domestic use for residential apartment/Group Housing Societies/Government water supply agencies in urban areas, agricultural sector, commercial use, industrial use, application for NOC along with documents, groundwater abstraction/restoration charges and various other aspects. The Central Ground Water Authority has also issued Guidelines for issuance of NOC for ground water withdrawal and interalia among other aspects it deals with over-exploited areas vis a vis issuance of NOC. 18. The Central Ground Water Authority has also issued Guidelines for issuance of NOC for ground water withdrawal and interalia among other aspects it deals with over-exploited areas vis a vis issuance of NOC. 18. Apart from the same, the Disaster Management Act, 2005, empowers the Central and State Governments for taking appropriate action in order to prevent the disasters, providing drinking water, essential provisions, health care and services in an affected area etc., apart from the power to take such other action as may be necessary for the proper administration and management of mitigating disasters in contemplation of the provisions of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 The Disaster Management Act, 2005 enables the Central and State Governments, District Administration and local authorities to prepare management plan in order to tackle with any emergency situations. 19. After having analysed the factual as well as legal situations discussed above, we have no doubt in our mind to hold that the State as well as District Authorities & the local bodies are duty bound to ensure that commercial establishments are not exploiting groundwater to an unprecedented level and establish such units for withdrawing groundwater without adequate NOC from the statutory authorities. We also find that under the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, Kerala Municipality Act, 1994 and the Building Rules issued thereunder, in order to construct any well, a permit is required from the Secretary of the local body. These are all clear indications to show that the Authorities are vested with ample powers to translate the intention of the Act, 2002 and other legislation discussed above, to avoid dearth of groundwater due to the over exploitation of groundwater by commercial and business establishments. These provisions and others specifically covered under the laws discussed above make it clear there shall be a proper and adequate mechanism in place so as to effectively control , regulate and manage the entire affairs in respect of withdrawing groundwater. Therefore we are of the definite opinion that the contention advanced by the petitioners that there is no law for the licensing of groundwater establishments is not correct. But on the other hand the state and the authorities are not taking adequate measures to curb the misuse of the groundwater, and exploitation done commercially, thus depleting the groundwater level day by day. 20. But on the other hand the state and the authorities are not taking adequate measures to curb the misuse of the groundwater, and exploitation done commercially, thus depleting the groundwater level day by day. 20. Taking into account all the above aspects, there will be a direction to the State Government as well as the District Administration & local bodies, to ensure that commercial establishments are operated only in terms of the Act, 2002, the Rules, 2004 and other notifications & guidelines issued by the Central Government, State Government and the Authority under the Disaster Management Act, 2005. We also direct the authority under the Act 2002 and Rules 2004 to conduct periodic inspections in order to identify as to whether the provisions of the said act and rules are to be extended to such areas and require registration of the wells. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions and observations.