9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (9) TMI 1672 - SC - Indian LawsCauvery water disputes between the States of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu - seeking assistance from the Attorney General of India to facilitate discussions between the two States to find a solution - HELD THAT - ll authorities in the territory of India are bound to act in aid of the Supreme Court. Needless to say, they are bound to obey the orders of the Supreme Court and also, if required, render assistance and aid for implementation of the order/s of this Court, but, unfortunately, the State of Karnataka is flouting the order and, in fact, creating a situation where the majesty of law is dented. This opportunity is granted as the last chance and it is repeated at the cost of repetition that this order is passed despite the resolution passed by the Joint Houses of State Legislature of the State of Karnataka. Call on 6th October, 2016 at 2.00 p.m.
Issues involved:
1. Interlocutory applications in C.A. No. 2456 of 2007 Analysis: The Supreme Court addressed interlocutory applications in C.A. No. 2456 of 2007 related to the Cauvery water disputes between the States of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. The Court sought assistance from the Attorney General of India to facilitate discussions between the two States to find a solution. The State of Karnataka was directed to release 6000 cusecs of water, and a meeting was held under the Chairmanship of the Union Minister of Water Resources to discuss the impasse. The Chief Ministers of both States presented their views, with Karnataka expressing concerns about releasing more water due to potential crop damage and water shortages. Tamil Nadu emphasized the critical need for water and urged Karnataka to comply with previous court orders. Despite efforts to reach a consensus, the matter was to be communicated to the Supreme Court for further consideration. In response to the situation, the Chief Minister of Karnataka communicated his government's position through letters to the Court and his legal representative. He highlighted the challenges faced by Karnataka in releasing water as directed by the Court, citing the unanimous Resolution passed by the State Legislature. The Attorney General informed the Court about the constitution of the Cauvery Management Board, with directions for States to nominate their representatives by a specified date. The Court reiterated the importance of all authorities acting in aid of the Supreme Court, emphasizing the need for compliance with its orders. Despite the State of Karnataka's reluctance to comply, the Court granted one final opportunity for water release, setting a deadline and warning against defiance. The Court emphasized the significance of Article 144 of the Constitution, which mandates all authorities to act in aid of the Supreme Court. It expressed concern over Karnataka's defiance of the court order and reiterated the obligation of the State to comply. The Court directed the constitution of the Cauvery Management Board and emphasized the need for cooperation from all parties involved. Karnataka was given a final chance to release water as per the Court's order, with a stern warning against continued defiance. The Court scheduled a follow-up hearing to monitor compliance and address any further developments in the matter.
|
