The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the central government to convene a meeting of the Chief Ministers of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu to find a solution to the impasse over Cauvery river water. Asking the Centre to facilitate such a meeting, the bench of Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Uday Umesh Lalit also directed the Karnataka government to release 6,000 cusecs of water to Tamil Nadu every day for the next three days.
The apex court’s instruction to the central government came after Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi suggested that the Centre could sit with the two Chief Ministers - K. Siddaramaiah and J. Jayalalithaa.
September 30 has been fixed as the next date for hearing on the matter.
The bench told the two states fighting over the river water to respect the principle of “federal co-operation”, and advised Tamil Nadu to exercise “patience” and shun being “emotional” over the issue.
“We direct the State of Karnataka to release 6,000 cusecs of water. We are sure that Karnataka would not create any impediment or obstruction in the release of water,” the apex court said.
The bench also clarified in the order that the water to be given to Tamil Nadu (6,000 cusecs per day for next three days) would be adjusted against the total release of water to the state.
Attacking Karnataka for not complying with the court’s September 20 order to release 6,000 cusecs of water every day for next seven days, Tamil Nadu said Karnataka’s plea seeking modification of order should not be heard.
“They (Karnataka) should not be heard till they obey the orders of the court. This is a gross defiance of the court’s order … end of the rule of law,” senior counsel Shekhar Naphade, appearing for Tamil Nadu, told the court.
He further said: “Tamil Nadu is tired of this litigation. Two-thirds of Bangalore is outside the Cauvery basin, yet (Cauvery) water flows into it.”
Naphade described the stand of Karnataka as “obstructionist” and “obstinate”, Naphade told the bench that “Tamil Nadu has come to the conclusion that, come what may, Karnataka will not give it (Tamil Nadu) its legitimate share (of Cauvery water).”
Over-ruling Naphade’s assertion that Karnataka should not be heard, the bench said: “Attempt should be made by the executive of both States to manage and resolve the issue.”
At one stage in the course of the hearing, the bench asked senior counsel Fali S Nariman as to under what provision of the Constitution the Karnataka assembly had passed the resolution denying release of Cauvery water to Tamil Nadu.
The Karnataka government, in an application on September 26, told the Supreme Court that it can release additional water to Tamil Nadu only by December, and that “Karnataka’s all major cities, including Bengaluru, are falling short of drinking water”.
The apex court’s instruction to the central government came after Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi suggested that the Centre could sit with the two Chief Ministers - K. Siddaramaiah and J. Jayalalithaa.
September 30 has been fixed as the next date for hearing on the matter.
The bench told the two states fighting over the river water to respect the principle of “federal co-operation”, and advised Tamil Nadu to exercise “patience” and shun being “emotional” over the issue.
“We direct the State of Karnataka to release 6,000 cusecs of water. We are sure that Karnataka would not create any impediment or obstruction in the release of water,” the apex court said.
The bench also clarified in the order that the water to be given to Tamil Nadu (6,000 cusecs per day for next three days) would be adjusted against the total release of water to the state.
Attacking Karnataka for not complying with the court’s September 20 order to release 6,000 cusecs of water every day for next seven days, Tamil Nadu said Karnataka’s plea seeking modification of order should not be heard.
“They (Karnataka) should not be heard till they obey the orders of the court. This is a gross defiance of the court’s order … end of the rule of law,” senior counsel Shekhar Naphade, appearing for Tamil Nadu, told the court.
He further said: “Tamil Nadu is tired of this litigation. Two-thirds of Bangalore is outside the Cauvery basin, yet (Cauvery) water flows into it.”
Naphade described the stand of Karnataka as “obstructionist” and “obstinate”, Naphade told the bench that “Tamil Nadu has come to the conclusion that, come what may, Karnataka will not give it (Tamil Nadu) its legitimate share (of Cauvery water).”
Over-ruling Naphade’s assertion that Karnataka should not be heard, the bench said: “Attempt should be made by the executive of both States to manage and resolve the issue.”
At one stage in the course of the hearing, the bench asked senior counsel Fali S Nariman as to under what provision of the Constitution the Karnataka assembly had passed the resolution denying release of Cauvery water to Tamil Nadu.
The Karnataka government, in an application on September 26, told the Supreme Court that it can release additional water to Tamil Nadu only by December, and that “Karnataka’s all major cities, including Bengaluru, are falling short of drinking water”.