SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(SC) 841

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
DIPAK MISRA, AMITAVA ROY, A.M. KHANWILKAR, JJ.
State of Karnataka – Appellants
Versus
State of T. Nadu & Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal 2453 of 2007 With C.A. No. 2454 of 2007, C.A. No. 2456 of 2007
Decided On : 18-10-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :- Fali S. Nariman, Sr. Adv., Anil B. Divan, Sr. Adv., S.S. Javali, Sr. Adv., (M.R. Naik, Adv. Gen.), Mohan V. Katarki, S.C. Sharma, V.N. Raghupathy, R.S. Ravi, J.M. Gangadhar, Ranvir Singh, Advocates.
For the (CA 2454 of 2007) :- Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv., Jaideep gupta, Sr. Adv., G. Prakash, Jishnu, Mrs. Priyanka Prakash, Mrs. Beena Prakash, Manu Srinath.
For the (CA 2456 of 2007) :- B. Balaji, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mukul Rohatgi, AG, Ms. Pinky Anand, ASG, Ajay Sharma, S. Wasim A. Qadri, Ms. Madhavi Divan, Ms. Nidhi Khanna, Zaid Ali, Ms. Snidha Mehra, Ms. Somya Rathore, Karan Seth, Ms. Saudamini Sharma, Ms. Kritika Sachdeva, D. S. Mahra, Shekhar Naphade, Sr. Adv., Rakesh Dwivedi, Sr. Adv., Subramonium Prasad, Sr. Adv., G. Umapathy, C. Paramasivam, B. Balaji, Rajesh Mahale, A.S. Nambiar, Sr. Adv., V.G. Pragasam, P.K. Manohar, Ms. Shania Vasudevan, Prabu Ramasubramanian, Pankaj Kr. Mishra, A.S. Bhasme, B. Balaji, Ramesh Babu M.R.,.

The obligation of the Executive to maintain peace and harmony between the states and their citizens, and to ensure compliance with the court's orders.

Headnote:

Water Dispute - Inter-State Water Dispute - The court addressed the nature of interim order and emphasized the obligation of the Executive to maintain peace and harmony between the states and their citizens.

Fact of the Case:

The court considered the dire need of water in both Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, and the prediction of the north-east monsoon setting in from 25th October, 2016.

Finding of the Court:

The court reiterated the earlier order for the Executive to ensure peace and harmony between the states and their citizens, and extended the interim order until further orders.

Issues: Maintainability of the appeals under Article 136 of the Constitution and the nature of the interim order.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the obligation of the Executive to maintain peace and harmony between the states and their citizens, and to ensure compliance with the interim order.

Final Decision: The matter was listed for further hearing on 19th October, 2016, and the interim order passed on the earlier occasion was to continue until further orders.

ORDER

Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, learned Attorney General for India being assisted by Ms. Pinky Anand, learned Additional Solicitor General has filed the Report of the Committee. The conclusion of the Report reads as under:-

"Social Aspects

1. The plights of farmers in both the states have been witnessed. In the absence of required water the labour employment for farming and fishing is also limited creating a scenario of unemployment and financial hardship to them.

2. There has been large number of suicides reported in Mandya district of Karnataka.

3. The Government of Karnataka has declared 42 out of 48 Talukas under Cauvery basin as drought affected Talukas based on Central Government guidelines.

4. Both the States of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu need to appreciate interest of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry in protection of their established irrigation and Karnataka's aspirations for development respectively and should educate their people accordingly.

Technical Aspects

1. The deficit impact on account of water allocation at 50% dependability can be neutralised to some extent by optimal, dynamic and resilient planning of the cropped area considering the flow pattern and forecast. This can address the issue of unemployment and financial hardship in the basin States.

2. The water application techniques are outdated and unscientific and the value of water is not realised. The water applied to the field is on the concept of flooding from one field to another adjacent field and as such the water consumption is on the higher side and during period of distress this becomes very significant depending upon the soil condition. The infrastructure to deliver water to the farmers is century old and has very low conveyance efficiency. This needs to be modernised for optimal use of scarce water. The conveyance efficiency can be further improved by piped distribution network and application efficiency by micro irrigation (sprinkler and drip) and precision irrigation. In addition, on-farm development (OFD) works may be provided to ensure equitable distribution of water to individual farmer's field.

3. At places near the coast the ground water cannot be utilised for the reason that water is saline due to ingress from sea water. The only source of irrigation in such areas is surface water from Mettur reservoir.

4. The efforts made by Government of Tamil Nadu by way of providing subsidised agricultural inputs can bear fruits only when sufficient water is made available for the full crop period.

5. The drinking water demands needs to be optimised and efficient delivery mechanism needs to be put in place.

6. Automated water measuring instrumentation needs to be provided for transparent recording of flows and water diversion along with system for online transmission and retrieval of data through dashboard.

7. Crop alignment and crop diversification need to be practiced.

8. Participatory Irrigation Management is to be encouraged for optimal, efficient and equitable distribution of water amongst the farmers."

2. As we find from the Report, the Committee has not suggested with regard to any quantity of water. Mr. Rohatgi, learned Attorney General has, when the matter was taken up at forenoon session, submitted that the appeals by special leave filed by all the States, namely, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Kerala are not maintainable. Mr. A.S. Nambiar, learned senior counsel appearing for the Union Territory of Puducherry echoed the same argument.

3. Mr. Rohatgi addressed at length with regard to the maintainability of the appeals and after he has finished, Mr. Fali S. Nariman, learned senior counsel appearing for the State of Karnataka commenced his submission. The stand of Mr. Nariman is that the appeal by special leave is maintainable. We intend to adjudicate the maintainability of the appeals which have been preferred by special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution first.

4. At this juncture, the issue that arises for consideration is what should be the nature of interim order.



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top