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

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.

India News

Delhi deploys 25,000 personnel, installs CCTV cameras ahead of CJP march

More than 25,000 police and paramilitary personnel have been deployed in Delhi ahead of the CJP’s planned protest march at Connaught Place. Authorities have also imposed restrictions and stepped up CCTV surveillance.

Published

on

Delhi has stepped up security ahead of a planned protest march by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), with more than 25,000 police and paramilitary personnel deployed and additional surveillance measures introduced in parts of the national capital.

The planned “Lehra Do Tiranga” march is scheduled to take place at Central Park in Connaught Place on Friday, October 16. Authorities have also imposed prohibitory orders in Connaught Place and surrounding areas as part of the security arrangements.

Security tightened across Connaught Place

The security arrangements include the deployment of police and paramilitary personnel, along with the installation of additional CCTV cameras at Central Park and Rajiv Chowk Metro Station.

Prohibitory orders have been imposed under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) in Connaught Place and nearby areas. Central Park is also scheduled to remain closed for two days, with authorities advising the public to avoid the area during the arrangements.

A high-level meeting chaired by Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar, attended by senior police officers, was held on Thursday to review preparations ahead of the planned demonstration.

Why CJP is planning the march

The CJP has called the march to protest the arrest of its leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka and to demand the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over alleged irregularities in voter rolls.

The party’s protest is centred on its allegations concerning the electoral roll revision process. These are the protesters’ claims and should not be treated as independently established findings.

With Jantar Mantar no longer designated as a protest site, Central Park in Connaught Place has emerged as the proposed location for the fresh demonstration. The protest has also received support from the Aam Aadmi Party and the All India Students’ Association, according to the report.

Traders raise concerns over business disruptions

The heightened security measures have also prompted concerns among traders in the area.

Traders at Palika Bazaar have expressed concern about disruptions during the festive season, pointing to losses associated with previous protests. The concerns reflect the potential impact of repeated demonstrations and security restrictions on commercial activity in central Delhi.

Delhi Police has said it will facilitate peaceful demonstrators selectively while maintaining public order and protecting property.

Continue Reading

India News

Mallikarjun Kharge’s ‘Your Friends’ jab at Rahul Gandhi over congress exits

Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge took a dig at Rahul Gandhi after the Leader of the Opposition reportedly described former party leaders Jyotiraditya Scindia and Ghulam Nabi Azad as among those who had left the Congress.

Published

on

Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge made a pointed remark about former Congress leaders after Rahul Gandhi reportedly described some of those who left the party as people who had been driven by personal interests or fear. The exchange took place during an informal interaction involving young Congress workers, according to a report published on October 15.

Rahul Gandhi, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, reportedly referred to former Congress leaders Jyotiraditya Scindia and Ghulam Nabi Azad while discussing people who had left the party. Kharge responded with a quip that drew attention to Rahul Gandhi’s earlier association with the leaders.

What Rahul Gandhi said about leaders who left Congress

During the interaction, Rahul Gandhi reportedly said that the Congress was now left with committed workers, describing those who remained in the party as ‘babbar sher’ or lions. He alleged that people who were greedy or afraid had left, citing Scindia and Azad as examples.

His reported remarks referred to people who, he suggested, had left because of the attraction of positions and security or fear of investigative agencies such as the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

These were Rahul Gandhi’s political characterisations of the leaders who left the Congress, rather than independently established explanations for their departures.

Kharge’s response to Rahul Gandhi

Reacting to Rahul Gandhi’s account, Kharge remarked, “They were all your friends.”

The comment referred to the association Rahul Gandhi had previously shared with some of the leaders who later left the Congress. Rahul Gandhi responded by saying that his sister, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, was present and knew that Scindia was not his friend.

He subsequently reflected on the difficulty of identifying friends and opponents in politics, saying that people who appear to be friends may not necessarily be so, and the reverse may also be true.

Why Jyotiraditya Scindia and Ghulam Nabi Azad were mentioned

Jyotiraditya Scindia left the Congress in 2020 and joined the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). His departure was followed by a political crisis in Madhya Pradesh that resulted in the fall of the Congress government led by Kamal Nath.

Ghulam Nabi Azad, a veteran Congress leader, resigned from the party in August 2022. In his resignation letter, he criticised Rahul Gandhi’s leadership and the functioning of the party’s internal decision-making process.

Both leaders subsequently became prominent examples in political discussions about senior figures leaving the Congress, although their reasons and circumstances differed.

Rahul Gandhi’s message to young Congress workers

The interaction also focused on protests and political mobilisation. Rahul Gandhi reportedly told young Congress workers that demonstrations and struggles were part of their political training and encouraged them to explore new and creative ways of protesting.

He also suggested holding protests at Jantar Mantar, according to the report.

Congress president Kharge and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra were present during the interaction. Rahul Gandhi also claimed that the government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi was dependent on the next eight to 10 months, though the report did not establish this as an independently verified assessment.

The exchange between Kharge and Rahul Gandhi offered a glimpse into the Congress leadership’s informal discussions, while bringing the departures of Scindia and Azad back into the political conversation.

Continue Reading

India News

Delhi Police offers 11-person limit for CJP’s Connaught Place protest

Delhi Police has offered to facilitate a group of 11 people at Central Park in Connaught Place for the Cockroach Janata Party’s October 16 protest, while warning that violations of prohibitory orders could invite legal action.

Published

on

CJP protest to continue

Delhi Police has proposed allowing a group of 11 people to carry the national flag and sing the national anthem at Central Park in Connaught Place on October 16, ahead of a protest called by the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) over alleged electoral fraud.

The police said it could facilitate the group at a suitable place in the park, while appealing to the public not to join the proposed gathering in large numbers. The offer comes amid prohibitory orders in Connaught Place and adjoining areas under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

CJP founder Abhijeet Dipke has called on people to assemble at Central Park at 5 pm on Friday with the national flag. The proposed demonstration, named “Lehra Do Tiranga”, follows the detention of CJP members Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka during an earlier protest.

Why Delhi Police proposed limiting the gathering

In its statement, Delhi Police cited the prevailing security and law-and-order situation in the area. It also referred to information from the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) that Central Park would remain closed on October 16 and 17 for administrative reasons.

Deputy Commissioner of Police Neha Yadav said the NDMC had informed the police about the closure and had asked that no gathering be allowed near the park.

The police also cited representations from trader and market associations in Connaught Place and surrounding areas. According to the police, the associations had raised concerns about unlawful assemblies and their impact on businesses, particularly during the festive season.

Police warned that violations of Section 163 BNSS would invite appropriate legal action. It also stressed that the national flag must be displayed and carried, and the national anthem sung, in the prescribed manner with due respect and dignity.

Delhi High Court declines to stop CJP protest

The proposed gathering reached the Delhi High Court after a vendor sought intervention over concerns about disruption to businesses and public movement in Connaught Place.

On Thursday, the court declined to restrain the CJP from holding the protest. It recorded the police’s assurance that all possible measures under the law would be taken to regulate the gathering and maintain peace.

The petition was filed by a vendor at Palika Bazar in Connaught Place, who raised concerns about the potential impact of the demonstration on traders and others working in the area.

Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, appearing for the authorities, told the court that steps had already been taken to regulate the proposed protest.

CJP’s protest call follows detention of party members

Dipke’s October 16 protest call follows earlier demonstrations over alleged electoral fraud. CJP members Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka are in jail on trespass charges after raising the national flag at Jantar Mantar earlier this week, according to the report.

The party has been protesting over alleged electoral fraud and has raised questions about the Election Commission.

Dipke has urged people to gather at Central Park with the national flag, arguing that raising the Tricolour should not be treated as a crime.

The police’s proposal to facilitate a group of 11 people came as the authorities sought to prevent a larger gathering at the site. The CJP’s response to the police’s offer was still awaited in the report published on October 15.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com