krishna water dispute

krishna water dispute krishna water dispute

Why in discussion?

recently Supreme Court Two Supreme Court judges have recused themselves from hearing a case related to the dispute over sharing of Krishna river water between Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Maharashtra and Karnataka.

  • He cited the reason that he was partisan Don't want to be a target because disputes related to their home states Is.

boycott of judges

  • It deals with the absence of an officer of the Presiding Court or an administrative officer from participating in official proceedings such as legal proceedings due to conflict of interest.
  • When there is a conflict of interest, a Judge withdraws from hearing the case so as not to create a presumption that he has been biased while deciding the matter.
  • any formal rules governing revaluation No, although the issue has been dealt with in several Supreme Court judgments.
    • Ranjit Thakur v Union of India (1987) case In 2011, the Supreme Court held that it strengthens the argument against the possibility of bias in the mind of the other party.
    • The court should see the argument of the side present before it and decide whether it is biased or not.

key points

  • introduction:
    • In the year 2021, Andhra Pradesh alleged that the Telangana government had "unconstitutional and illegal" They were deprived of their legitimate share of water for drinking and irrigation.
    • Water from the Srisailam reservoir, which is the main reservoir of river water between the two states, has become a major point of conflict.
      • Andhra Pradesh opposed the use of water from Srisailam reservoir by Telangana for power generation.
      • Srisailam Reservoir is built on the Krishna River in Andhra Pradesh. It is situated in the Nallamala hills.
    • It further argued that Telangana is refusing to comply with the decisions taken in the Apex Council constituted under the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014, the directions of the Krishna River Management Board (KRMB) constituted under the Act and the Centre's directions.
  • Background:
    • Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal:
      • In the year 1969 under the 'Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956' ,Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal, (KWDT) was established and submitted its report in the year 1973.
      • It was also laid down that the 'Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal' order can be reviewed or amended by any competent authority or tribunal at any time after May 31, 2000.
    • 2nd Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal
      • In the year 2004, the second Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal was set up which submitted its final report in the year 2010. In the decision given in the year 2010, 81 TMC of surplus water was allocated to Maharashtra, 177 TMC to Karnataka and 190 TMC to Andhra Pradesh.
    • After KWDT's 2010 report:
      • Andhra Pradesh challenged this through a special leave petition in the Supreme Court in the year 2011.
      • In 2013, the Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal released the 'Further Report', which was again challenged in the Supreme Court by Andhra Pradesh in 2014.
    • Creation of Telangana:
      • After the creation of Telangana, Andhra Pradesh has asked to include Telangana as a separate party in the KWDT and redistribute the allocation of Krishna water among four states instead of three.
        • It is based on Section 89 of the Andhra Pradesh States Reorganization Act, 2014.
        • For the purposes of this clause, it is clarified that project-specific allocations already made by the Tribunal on or before the appointed day shall be binding on the States concerned.
  • Constitutional Provisions:
    • interstate river water dispute There is a provision in Article 262 of the Constitution of India for the settlement of
      • Under this, Parliament can make provision for the adjudication of any dispute or complaint regarding the use, distribution and control of water of any inter-state river and river valley.
    • Parliament has enacted two laws, the River Board Act (1956) and the Inter-State Water Disputes Act (1956).
      • The River Boards Act provides for the establishment of river boards by the central government for the regulation and development of inter-state rivers and river basins.
      • The Inter-State Water Disputes Act empowers the central government to establish an ad-hoc tribunal to adjudicate disputes between two or more states in relation to the waters of an inter-state river or river valley. does.
        • Neither the Supreme Court nor any other court has jurisdiction in respect of any water dispute which may be referred to such tribunal under this Act.

Krishna river:

  • Source: It originates near Mahabaleshwar (Satara) in Maharashtra. It is the second largest river in peninsular India after the Godavari River.
  • Drainage: It flows through four states of Maharashtra (303 km), North Karnataka (480 km) and the remaining 1300 km through Telangana and Andhra Pradesh before falling into the Bay of Bengal.
  • Tributaries: Tungabhadra, Mallaprabha, Koyna, Bhima, Ghataprabha, Yerla, Varna, Dindi, Musi and Dudhganga.


Krishna River krishna water dispute कृष्णा जल विवाद

way ahead

  • Water disputes can be settled or settled only when a Permanent Tribunal is established with appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court on the decisions given by the Tribunal.
  • The immediate goal of any constitutional government should be to amend Article 262 and amend the Inter-State Water Disputes Act and implement it equally.
  • It is time that we all reconsider our strategy regarding water management, not only within the states but also at the national level keeping in view the water scenario in the next 30 years, strictly in the channels of communication for consensus. needs to be improved.
  • The system should be reformed in such a way that the body created by the Center is adequately represented to protect the interests of the states.


Read more Static GK, Gk Quiz and Daily Current affairs January 2022: