The Supreme Court dismissed a plea on water bottle labelling as “luxury litigation,” stressing that importing foreign standards is impractical. The Court urged focus on ensuring access to safe drinking water in villages lacking basic potable water facilities.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court recently heard a plea concerning stringent labelling requirements on drinking water bottles and the use of plastic packaging. A Bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi expressed strong reservations about the practicality of such demands, observing that the petition failed to address the more pressing issue of access to potable drinking water across large parts of India.
ALSO READ: BREAKING| You Cannot Act As A Gatekeeper: Supreme Court Slams Up Judicial Officer Over Bail Hearing
During the hearing, Justice Surya Kant underscored the need for courts to remain conscious of what is realistically implementable in the Indian context. He cautioned against the uncritical adoption of regulatory standards from developed jurisdictions such as the United States, Australia, or Saudi Arabia.
“Given the realities we are dealing with, we must remain conscious of what is actually implementable. Importing standards from jurisdictions like the US is not always feasible. One must be alive to the ground realities,”
the Court observed.
The Bench noted that while international guidelines may appear attractive on paper, their application in a country with vast socio-economic disparities often remains impractical.
The Court was particularly critical of the petitioner’s focus on the precise descriptions and disclosures on bottled water labels, describing such concerns as “luxury litigation.” Justice Surya Kant remarked that the judiciary would have been more receptive had the plea highlighted the lack of access to safe drinking water in rural and underprivileged areas.
“Had the petitioner raised concerns about ensuring drinking water supply in villages lacking access to potable water, the Court could have appreciated it,”
the Bench noted.
According to the Court, debates around detailed labelling norms on packaged drinking water primarily cater to urban consumers and do little to address the fundamental issue of water scarcity affecting millions.
The Bench also dismissed the petitioner’s reliance on foreign regulatory frameworks, calling such comparisons largely academic. Justice Surya Kant pointed out that governance and regulatory challenges in India must be understood within the country’s unique social and economic realities.
Drawing a historical parallel, the judge referred to Mahatma Gandhi’s approach after returning to India.
“When Mahatma Gandhi returned to India, he went to the villages to understand people’s lives. Visiting underprivileged areas will reveal the true challenges around access to drinking water,”
the Court observed.
This remark highlighted the Court’s emphasis on grassroots realities over theoretical policy debates.
While declining to entertain the plea in its present form, the Supreme Court granted liberty to the petitioner to submit a detailed representation to the competent authorities. The Bench assured that such a representation would be duly considered in accordance with the law.
READ LIVE COVERAGE
