Inter-State Water Dispute: Karnataka Loses Bid for Immediate Relief, Court Recommends Fresh Proceedings

Facts

The Plaintiff State of Andhra Pradesh filed a suit against Defendant No.1 State of Karnataka in 2003 under the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956.
The Plaintiff sought injunctions to restrain Karnataka from constructing various water projects and impounding water until resolution of disputes.
The Plaintiff specifically mentioned projects like Paragodu Project on the Chitravathi river, Teeta Project, Nagarkare tank, and others in different districts.
The Plaintiff also requested the Government of India to take action in accordance with the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act.

Also Read: Balancing Power and Transparency: Electoral Bonds Struck Down, Disclosure Mandated

The plaintiff requested the court to pass further decree or orders as deemed fit
The court will consider the facts and circumstances of the case before making a decision
Costs of the proceedings are to be awarded in favor of the plaintiff and against defendant No.1
The matter has been primarily focused on the issue of interim relief over the past 19 years.
The plaintiff State has not yet requested the constitution of an Inter-State River Water Disputes Tribunal to address the issues.
Various developments such as increased water usage for developmental activities have occurred in the basin during this time.
Parties have exchanged pleadings and evidence has been placed on record
The matter needs to be considered in the light of the present day situation

Also Read: Recall of Resolution Plan Approval: Legal Analysis

The Original Suit is disposed of, leaving all questions of law open.
The plaintiff State is given liberty to take appropriate proceedings in law afresh, including approaching the Central Government to constitute an Inter-State River Water Disputes Tribunal or seek any other remedy.
The plaintiff State is allowed to rely on the pleadings and evidence provided in the case for taking appropriate steps in accordance with the law at any stage.

Also Read: SC Upholds Bank’s Right to Forfeit Earnest Money in Failed E-Auction Due to Lack of “Exceptional Circumstances”

Case Title: THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA . (2022 INSC 1028)

Case Number: ORGNL.SUIT No.-000005-000005 / 2003