The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a petition raising concerns over the alleged non-compliance with international standards for packaged drinking water in India, terming the issue as “luxury litigation” in light of the widespread lack of basic drinking water across the country.

A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justice Joymalya Bagchi, was hearing a writ petition filed by Sarang Vaman Yadwadkar, seeking directives to improve the quality standards of bottled water.

At the outset, the CJI questioned the relevance of the plea, observing, “Where is the drinking water in this country, madam? People do not have drinking water; the quality of bottled water will come later on.”

Senior Advocate Anita Shenoy, representing the petitioner, argued that citizens should at least be guaranteed safe and clean packaged drinking water, citing Section 18 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, which mandates compliance with prescribed safety norms. She emphasized that statutory obligations could not be overlooked.

The Court, however, was not persuaded. The CJI described the petition as reflecting an “urban-centric perspective,” noting that rural populations primarily rely on groundwater. “This is an urban-centric approach; the people in rural areas drink groundwater, and nothing happens to them,” he remarked.

The Bench further stated that the petition would have been more meaningful if it addressed villages where even basic drinking water is unavailable. “Water bottle should have this content, that content. These are all luxury litigations,” the CJI remarked.

When counsel stressed the public health implications and denied that the plea was a luxury litigation, the CJI reiterated that the petition ignored India’s ground realities. “Do you think we will be able to introduce the USA, Japan, EU guidelines? Let us face the ground realities of the country. Nobody takes up the cause of the poor; all this is rich and urbanised phobia,” he added.

The petitioner also highlighted discrepancies between Indian permissible limits and World Health Organization standards, but the Bench declined to examine the issue at this stage.

Before closing the matter, the Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw the plea, granting liberty to approach the relevant authorities. The CJI concluded, “When Gandhi came to India, he travelled to all poor parts. Ask the petitioner to travel to the poor parts where there is a challenge even to get water, then he will understand what is India.”

Case: SARANG VAMAN YADWADKAR Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. | W.P.(C) No. 1222/2025