CHENNAI: An afternoon after the Supreme Court's cut-off date asking the Centre to get a hold of a scheme to enforce the general award of the Cauvery river water tribunal ended on Friday, the Union executive filed a petition within the apex courtroom searching for three-months time to enforce the order.
Cauvery being an emotive issue, it might cause unrest in Karnataka where the assembly polls are round the corner, the Centre said in its petition. It additionally sought clarifications from the courtroom as as to if it might "frame the scheme" editing the suggestions of the Cauvery tribunal. Tamil Nadu executive, meanwhile, initiated contempt court cases against Union cabinet secretary P K Sinha and water assets secretary U P Singh for wilful disobedience of the courtroom order and demanded that the Cauvery control board and water law committee be arrange soon.
The Election Commission of India had announced the time table for the assembly polls to Karnataka on March 27.
"Cauvery is a very emotive issue in Karnataka and in the past, the issue has led to serious law and order situations leading to avoidable loss of human lives and property. If the Centre were to constitute a scheme under section 6A of Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956 and notify it... it would lead to massive public outrage and vitiate election process, " the Centre said while detailing the efforts taken after the courtroom verdict on February 16, equivalent to convening a gathering of leader secretaries of the four basin states/Union Territory on March nine.
Centre: Our perspectives on framing scheme vary from states’
Arguing that the states would once more way courtroom if it framed any ‘scheme’, the Centre urged the courtroom to explain that during case CMB is to be constituted, whether or not it could have flexibility to modify the composition of the board to a mix of administrative and technical body, and no longer purely a technical body as really useful via the tribunal. It would assist effective habits of the business of the board, the Centre argued. Clarifications have additionally been sought as as to if the board will have functions other from the ones really useful for the CMB via the tribunal. The Centre pointed out that it had gained divergent perspectives from states on framing a scheme.
Both TN and Puducherry demanded that the Centre represent CMB and Cauvery Water Regulation Committee as per the tribunal award. However, Karnataka claimed that the board will have to be part of the scheme. It additionally pointed out that the tribunal had simplest made suggestions. “The scheme pondered within the judgment is constitution of a ‘dispute resolution body’ as distinct from the ‘control body’ really useful via the tribunal… The control and law of water is the sole prerogative of the state,” the petition said referring to the provisions within the State listing within the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. “The SC has no longer endorsed or approved CMB in its judgment… The scheme framed via Centre has to go thru legislative process,” the petition added, quoting Karnataka’s stand. Kerala suggested that the CMB be one in all administrators.
Cauvery being an emotive issue, it might cause unrest in Karnataka where the assembly polls are round the corner, the Centre said in its petition. It additionally sought clarifications from the courtroom as as to if it might "frame the scheme" editing the suggestions of the Cauvery tribunal. Tamil Nadu executive, meanwhile, initiated contempt court cases against Union cabinet secretary P K Sinha and water assets secretary U P Singh for wilful disobedience of the courtroom order and demanded that the Cauvery control board and water law committee be arrange soon.
The Election Commission of India had announced the time table for the assembly polls to Karnataka on March 27.
"Cauvery is a very emotive issue in Karnataka and in the past, the issue has led to serious law and order situations leading to avoidable loss of human lives and property. If the Centre were to constitute a scheme under section 6A of Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956 and notify it... it would lead to massive public outrage and vitiate election process, " the Centre said while detailing the efforts taken after the courtroom verdict on February 16, equivalent to convening a gathering of leader secretaries of the four basin states/Union Territory on March nine.
Centre: Our perspectives on framing scheme vary from states’
Arguing that the states would once more way courtroom if it framed any ‘scheme’, the Centre urged the courtroom to explain that during case CMB is to be constituted, whether or not it could have flexibility to modify the composition of the board to a mix of administrative and technical body, and no longer purely a technical body as really useful via the tribunal. It would assist effective habits of the business of the board, the Centre argued. Clarifications have additionally been sought as as to if the board will have functions other from the ones really useful for the CMB via the tribunal. The Centre pointed out that it had gained divergent perspectives from states on framing a scheme.
Both TN and Puducherry demanded that the Centre represent CMB and Cauvery Water Regulation Committee as per the tribunal award. However, Karnataka claimed that the board will have to be part of the scheme. It additionally pointed out that the tribunal had simplest made suggestions. “The scheme pondered within the judgment is constitution of a ‘dispute resolution body’ as distinct from the ‘control body’ really useful via the tribunal… The control and law of water is the sole prerogative of the state,” the petition said referring to the provisions within the State listing within the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. “The SC has no longer endorsed or approved CMB in its judgment… The scheme framed via Centre has to go thru legislative process,” the petition added, quoting Karnataka’s stand. Kerala suggested that the CMB be one in all administrators.
Cauvery: Centre cites Karnataka poll, wants 3 months
![Cauvery: Centre cites Karnataka poll, wants 3 months]()
Reviewed by Kailash
on
April 01, 2018
Rating:
