The Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal-II headed by Justice Brajesh Kumar has set aside objections raised by the Karnataka government over the appointment of Karnataka judge as the member of the tribunal.
The appointment of Karnataka High Court judge Justice Ram Mohan Reddy dominated the proceedings of the tribunal for the second day on Tuesday. Anil B. Diwan, who represented Karnataka in the hearings, said the appointment of a sitting judge from one of the petitioner States could lead to problems and Karnataka had preferred to raise the issue to ensure that the other petitioner States did not raise objections to the appointment in future.
Representatives of Maharashtra and Telangana States did not raise any objection to the appointment of Justice Ram Mohan Reddy while the Andhra Pradesh representative, A.K. Ganguly, favoured that the tribunal resolve the objection raised by the Karnataka government as it was serious in nature. Senior advocate T.R. Andhyarujina, who represented Maharashtra, said there was no provision in law preventing the appointment of a member from a State in the tribunal when that particular State was a party to the case.
'In line with provisions'
Arguing on behalf of the Central government, Wasim A. Qadri said the appointment of Justice Ram Mohan Reddy was in line with the existing provisions and the appointment came following a recommendation made by the Chief Justice of India. The tribunal, on its part, is understood to have wondered why the Karnataka government raised objections to the appointment at this juncture and said there was no rational in the arguments made.
The Karnataka representative, however, contended that it was not against the appointment of the member and that it was urging the tribunal to take its objections on record.
Continuing his arguments, the Karnataka representative reiterated that the Telangana and Andhra Pradesh States should share the water allocated to the erstwhile united Andhra Pradesh. The tribunal would continue the hearings on Thursday too.
