SC orders infrastructure for Orissa-Andhra Inter-state Water disputes tribunal
26.11.2010 | 14:56
New Delhi
Upmanyu Trivedi


An unhappy Supreme Court today directed the Centre to provide all necessary infrastructure for a functional Inter-state Water Disputes tribunal which was set up to settle water dispute between Orissa and Andhra Pradesh. The centre has been given three months time to make all arrangements.

Both states have for once joined hands to file a joint interim application before the apex court to operationalise the tribunal which was set up by a Supreme Court order dated 6.2.2009 to adjudicate dispute between the two states arising from construction of side channel and flood canal project at village Katragada on the river Vansadhara in Andhra Pradesh.

Supreme Court bench of Justice Altamas Kabir and Cyriac Joseph passed the order today for providing suitable infrastructure and accommodation for all members of the Commission and judges of the tribunal.

The tribunal although was setup on February 24 this year could not start functioning for lack of infrastructure and accommodation for judges. The bench ordered "we direct union of India to provide suitable infrastructure and suitable accommodation for members within 3 months."

The bench also observed that it is unfortunate that even after one and a half years after Supreme Court order of constitution of the tribunal it is still not functional. The bench noted "we hope union of India takes immediate steps."

The state of Orissa had in February 2006 communicated to the Central Government for constitution of a tribunal to look into its grievances on construction of a flood flow canal at Katragada under section 3 of the Inter-State River Water Disputes (ISRWD) Act, 1956. The Supreme Court in a petition filed by state of Orissa had held on 6.2.2009 that, “It is now almost three years since the complaint was made by the state of Orissa but the central government has not taken any action in the matter. In this scenario, the prayer made by the state of Orissa does not appear to be unreasonable since the dispute between the two states does not confine itself to the construction of the side channel weir and the flood flow canal, but primarily involves the unilateral decision taken by the state of Andhra Pradesh to divert the river waters to the state of Andhra Pradesh, which could possibly disturb the agreement [between the two states] to share the waters of the river equally.”