Saturday, Sep 07, 2002
Saturday, Sep 07, 2002 |
| Southern States | ||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Southern States
-
Karnataka
By M. Madan Mohan
The withdrawal of the application came in the wake of observations made by the five-member Bench of the Supreme Court, which asked the State why it had not approached the Union Government to constitute a new tribunal to settle the dispute arising from the utilisation of the Krishna waters. The observations of the Supreme Court, which asked Karnataka to approach the Union Government for constituting a new tribunal rather than go to court once again, have not come as a surprise to those who have been watching the legal tangle on the Krishna water dispute, in which the State has been engaged for quite a long time. The obiter dicta of the Supreme Court while disposing of the case filed by Karnataka (OS 1/97) opposing the implementation of schemes planned by Andhra Pradesh in April 2000, formed the basis of Karnataka's fresh application opposing that State's new projects. While turning down the contention of Andhra Pradesh that it was using the surplus waters in terms of the "liberty'' to do so given by the Bachawat Tribunal, the five-member Bench said at that time: "It is the Central Government which has to exercise its discretion while clearing the projects of the lowest riparian State." The Bench also observed that if any riparian State approached the Union Government, the latter should constitute a tribunal. There was no ambiguity in the court's observation. It was of the view that only a new tribunal could go into the issue of utilisation of water, and that it was open for any of the riparian States to move the Union Government to get one constituted. There was nothing in the judgment restraining Andhra Pradesh from going ahead with its projects to warrant the court's intervention. Why did Karnataka choose to approach the Supreme Court again instead of asking the Centre to determine the surplus waters and stop Andhra Pradesh from going ahead with projects designed to use the surplus waters of Krishna, which were yet to be determined? Karnataka had a Hobson's choice when the deadline for the utilisation of 734 tmcft. of water allotted to it under Scheme A by the Bachawat Tribunal came to end in May 2000, one month after the Supreme Court disposed of the cases. It did not know whether or not to demand the constitution of a new tribunal for a review of the situation, including determination of surplus waters. Two conflicting sets of opinion were available to the Government at that time. One view was that it should seek the constitution of a tribunal and take before it the extension of time for utilisation of waters under Scheme A, in view of the time lost by Karnataka in fighting the battle in the Supreme Court and because of the inordinate delay in the Centre clearing the Krishna Basin projects. This would have helped postpone review of the allocation. The second view was that Karnataka should concentrate on completing the ongoing projects instead of bothering about the tribunal being constituted, which would help the State make up for the tardiness in the execution of projects. While everybody expected the Government to exercise the first option, it surprisingly chose to rely on the second. Accordingly, it has made considerable progress in the execution of the projects.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | Home |
Copyright © 2002, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|
