English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Tamil Nadu files contempt petition against Centre for not taking steps to resolve Cauvery dispute, Centre seeks time

Published

8 years ago

on

Tamil Nadu files contempt petition against Centre for not taking steps to resolve Cauvery dispute, Centre seeks time

The Tamil Nadu government on Saturday, March 31 filed a contempt petition against the Central government a day after the Supreme Court’s six-week deadline to put in place a mechanism to resolve Cauvery dispute ended.

The Supreme Court in its February 16 judgment in the Cauvery dispute had mandated the Central government to frame a scheme to set up a Cauvery Management Board (CMB) and a Cauvery Water Regulation Committee (CWRC) to monitor  the allocation of the river water among Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala and Puducherry.

Tamil Nadu accused the Centre of refusing to act to “protect the interests of the farmers and the larger interests of the State” and urged the apex court to “purge the contempt forthwith” by directing the Centre to frame a scheme in accordance with the judgment by providing for CMB and CWRC vested with all powers to give effect to the decision of the Cauvery Tribunal as well as the judgment of SC.

As per the February 16 judgment in the Cauvery appeals, the Centre had to frame the scheme in six weeks. The deadline ended on March 29. On the eve of the deadline, the Centre moved the Supreme Court for a three-month extension for the implementation of the judgment, citing the model code of conduct due to Karnataka elections. As Karnataka is having Assembly elections on May 12, the Centre wants to deal with the sensitive Cauvery issue after the polls.

The Centre felt that constitution of a scheme under Section 6(A) of the Inter-state River Waters Disputes Act and notification during the assembly election process would lead to massive public outrage, vitiate election process and cause serious law and order problems.

The Centre also sought a clarification on constitution of Cauvery Management Board from the top court asking whether it is open to the Central government to frame the scheme under 6(A) at variance with the recommendations contained in the report of the Cauvery water dispute tribunal regarding Cauvery Management Board.

It also wanted to know whether, if the board as recommended by the tribunal is to be constituted, would the Central government have the flexibility to modify the composition of the board to a mixture of administrative and technical body and not purely a technical body for effect conduct of the business of the board and considering overall sensitivity of the issues involved.

It also wanted a clarification whether the board framed under 6(A) of the act can have functions different from the ones recommended for Cauvery Management Board by the tribunal.

The Centre said in compliance of the February 6 order of the court and in spirit of true federalism, it convened a meeting of the Chief Secretaries of the four states and other officials and initiated consultations for arriving at a consensus. Divergent views were expressed by the states, said the Centre.

Tamil Nadu indicated that the scheme as mentioned by the Supreme Court has been defined in Section 6 which is to implement the final order of the tribunal under the court. The view of Tamil Nadu was that the Central government was mandated to put in place an authority or the body for implementation of the final decision by constituting the board and Cauvery Water Regulation Committee.

Puducherry and Kerala gave similar views but Karnataka was of the opinion that the Supreme Court has left the contents of the scheme to the discretion of the Central government.

It said the contention of Tamil Nadu that the board as formulated by the tribunal should be a part of the Scheme is wholly contrary to the mandate of the judgment and law.

Karnataka also contended that the Scheme contemplated in the Supreme Court judgment is a dispute resolution body as distinct from the management or regulation recommended by the tribunal. Therefore the question of asking Karnataka submit indent does not and should not arise for consideration.

Karnataka said the management and regulation of water of a state namely equitable share of a state determined by the adjudication is the sole prerogative of the state by reference to the entry 17 of the State list to the seventh schedule of the Constitution and therefore a scheme in the form of the board is clearly ultra vires of the Constitution.

Fifthly, Karnataka contended that the Supreme Court has not endorsed or approved the board in its judgment.

On the other hand, Tamil Nadu, which filed the contempt petition through advocate G. Umapathy as soon as the Supreme Court Registry opened on Saturday, reminded that the apex court has clearly, in its February 16 verdict, banned any extension of time to the Centre for framing a scheme.

“Central Government was bound to give effect to the judgment by framing a scheme so that the authorities under the scheme viz. Cauvery management board and Cauvery water regulation committee are put in place within six weeks… It has not taken any concrete steps in this regard,” Tamil Nadu contended.

It pointed that belatedly, after a period of three weeks, the Central government merely convened a meeting of the Chief Secretaries of the party States on 09.03.2018. “The convening of such a meeting does not in any way make any substantial progress in the matter of constitution of a Cauvery management board and Cauvery water regulation committee,” said Tamil Nadu.

Tamil Nadu said it had written to the Centre repeatedly on March 13, March 21 and March 23 for the constitution of a Cauvery management board within the six-week time limit so that farmers do not suffer during the irrigation season commencing from June 1.

“Ensuring timely release of water is apparent in the judgment itself and, therefore, any delay in constituting a Cauvery management board and a Cauvery water regulation committee is to the prejudice to the farmers of State of Tamil Nadu… In the absence of any cogent reasons for not constituting a Cauvery management board and a Cauvery water regulation committee within the time frame and/ or not making any substantial steps in that directions amount to wilful disobedience of the judgment of the Supreme Court,” Tamil Nadu said.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

India News

BJP releases first list of 47 candidates for Kerala assembly polls

The BJP has released its first list of 47 candidates for the Kerala Assembly elections scheduled for April 9, including three former Union ministers.

Published

13 hours ago

on

March 16, 2026

By

BJP releases list of candidates

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on Monday released its first list of 47 candidates for the upcoming Kerala Assembly elections scheduled for April 9.

Voting will take place for all 140 seats in the state assembly, with counting of votes scheduled for May 4. A party or coalition needs at least 70 seats to secure a majority in the House.

Among the candidates announced in the first list are three former Union ministers — Rajeev Chandrasekhar, V. Muraleedharan and George Kurian.

Key candidates announced

Kerala BJP chief and former Union minister Rajeev Chandrasekhar has been fielded from the Nemom assembly constituency. In the 2024 Lok Sabha election, Chandrasekhar lost the Thiruvananthapuram seat to three-time MP Shashi Tharoor, but he led in the Nemom assembly segment during that contest. The party believes this performance strengthens its prospects in the constituency.

Nemom has held political significance for the BJP since 2016, when senior leader O. Rajagopal won the seat and became the party’s first-ever MLA in the 140-member Kerala Legislative Assembly. The victory marked the BJP’s initial breakthrough in the state assembly.

However, the seat returned to the Left camp in the 2021 Assembly election when V. Sivankutty defeated BJP leader Kummanam Rajasekharan.

Former Union minister V. Muraleedharan will contest from the Kazhakoottam constituency, while George Kurian has been nominated from Kanjirappally.

Other candidates in the list

According to the list released by the party, several other candidates have also been announced for key constituencies. P. C. George will contest from Poonjar, R. Sreelekha from Vattiyoorkavu and Padmaja Venugopal from Thrissur.

The BJP has also nominated Sobha Surendran from Palakkad, Navya Haridas from Kozhikode North and Kavitha K. S. from Sulthanbathery, a reserved constituency.

Raji Prasad will contest from the Kunnathur seat reserved for Scheduled Castes, while R. Rashmi has been fielded from Kottarakkara.

Political backdrop in Kerala

Kerala’s electoral politics has traditionally alternated between the Left Democratic Front (LDF) and the Congress-led United Democratic Front (UDF). However, the BJP has been attempting to expand its presence in the state.

The alternating trend was interrupted in the 2021 Assembly election when the electorate returned the Pinarayi Vijayan-led government to power for a second consecutive term.

The BJP believes recent electoral performances and local body successes have strengthened its position as it prepares to contest the upcoming assembly polls.

Continue Reading

India News

Fire in ICU at SCB medical college hospital in Cuttack kills 10 patients

Ten patients died after a fire broke out in the trauma ICU at SCB medical college hospital in Cuttack early Monday morning. Odisha Chief Minister Mohan Charan Majhi announced compensation and ordered a judicial probe.

Published

22 hours ago

on

March 16, 2026

By

A major fire at the trauma care intensive care unit (ICU) of SCB Medical College and Hospital in Cuttack, Odisha, early Monday morning left ten patients dead and several hospital staff members injured.

According to officials, the fire broke out between 2:30 am and 3:00 am in the trauma ICU where critically ill patients were undergoing treatment. Emergency teams rushed to the scene soon after the incident, and multiple fire engines were deployed to control the blaze and assist in rescue operations.

Odisha Chief Minister Mohan Charan Majhi said hospital staff were injured while evacuating patients from the affected ward during the emergency.

Patients shifted as rescue operations continued

Following the fire, 23 patients were moved to other departments and wards within the hospital to ensure their safety and continued medical care.

Speaking to reporters, the Chief Minister said seven critically ill patients died while being shifted to other ICUs and wards, while three more succumbed later.

“A total of 23 patients have been shifted to other departments. Seven serious patients died while shifting to other ICUs and wards, while another three patients died later. I have directed the concerned officers for proper treatment of the injured patients,” Majhi said.

Chief minister visits hospital, announces compensation

Soon after the incident, Majhi visited the hospital along with Odisha Health Minister Mukesh Mahaling to review the situation. They also met patients who were undergoing treatment at the facility.

The Chief Minister announced financial assistance of ₹25 lakh for the families of each deceased patient.

He also ordered a judicial probe into the incident to determine the cause of the fire and examine safety measures at the hospital.

Authorities continue to monitor the condition of injured staff members and patients who were shifted from the ICU.

Continue Reading

India News

Arvind Kejriwal moves Supreme Court against Delhi High Court order in excise policy case

Arvind Kejriwal has approached the Supreme Court challenging a Delhi High Court order related to proceedings in the excise policy case and alleging violation of his fundamental rights.

Published

23 hours ago

on

March 16, 2026

By

Arvind Kejriwal

Aam Aadmi Party chief and former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has approached the Supreme Court of India challenging certain proceedings in the Delhi excise policy case and alleging a violation of his fundamental rights.

In a petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, Kejriwal has questioned a decision of the Delhi High Court that put a freeze on remarks related to the investigation conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation.

The petition also challenges an order of the High Court Chief Justice rejecting Kejriwal’s request to transfer the case to another bench.

Plea seeks change of bench

Earlier, on March 11, Kejriwal and several others submitted a representation to Delhi High Court Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya seeking reassignment of the case to what they described as an “impartial” judge.

In the representation, Kejriwal stated that he had a “grave, bona fide and reasonable apprehension” that the matter may not receive an impartial hearing before the current bench.

However, the Chief Justice declined the request and said the petition had been assigned as per the existing roster.

According to the communication sent by the High Court’s Registrar General on March 13 to eight individuals including Kejriwal, the Chief Justice noted that any decision on recusal must be taken by the judge hearing the matter and that there was no reason to transfer the petition administratively.

Order on trial court proceedings also challenged

Kejriwal has also challenged a March 9 order passed by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma of the Delhi High Court.

In that order, Justice Sharma had stayed a trial court direction that called for an investigation into a CBI officer who handled the excise policy case. The High Court had also asked the trial court to defer proceedings connected to the anti-money laundering aspect of the case.

Justice Sharma had further rejected certain observations made by the trial court while discharging Kejriwal and 22 others, stating that some of those remarks were erroneous.

Hearing expected on CBI plea

Meanwhile, Justice Sharma is scheduled to hear a petition filed by the CBI challenging the discharge of Kejriwal, former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia and others in the excise policy case.

The matter remains under judicial consideration as the legal challenge now moves to the Supreme Court.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com