Cauvery Water dispute: Order directing State of Karnataka to release 15000 cusecs of water, modified
Case BriefsSupreme Court
Published on September 12, 2016 January 11, 2017 By Editor
Supreme Court: In the Cauvery Water Dispute, the bench of Dipak Misra and U.U. Lalit, JJ modified it's order dated 05.09.2016 and directed the State of Karnataka to release 12000 cusecs of water per day and said that the direction, shall remain in force till 20th September, 2016. The Court had earlier ordered the State of Karnataka to release 15000 cusecs of water in the interest of farmers of the State of Tamil Nadu.
It was highlighted by Fali S. Nariman that in the State of Tamil Nadu, there is need of water as there is less of drinking water and the suffering of the farmers are immense. However, it was also highlighted that the State of Karnataka is facing enormous difficulty with regard to the water situation.
The Court took up the matter urgently because of the because of the spontaneous agitations in the various parts of Karnataka in the Cauvery basis which has paralysed the normal life besides destroying the public and private properties. The Court termed such activities to be absolutely disturbing and totally depreciable. It was said that agitation in spontaneity or propelled by some motivation or galvanized by any kind of catalystic component, can never form the foundation for seeking modification of an order. The citizens cannot become law unto themselves. When a court of law passes an order, it is the sacred duty of the citizens to obey the same. If there is any grievance, they are obligated under the law to take recourse to permissible legal remedies.
The Court, listing the matter on 20.09.2016, asked the inhabitants of both the States, namely, the State of Karnataka and State of Tamil Nadu to behave regard being had to the respect for law and order and the Executive of both the States are under the constitutional obligation to see that the law and order prevails. [State of Tamil Nadu v. State of Karnataka, 2016 SCC OnLine SC 932, decided on 12.09.2016]
Previous storyFifth Annual National Conference on contemporary legal scholarship organised by SLS, Pune
Next storyGovernment extends due date for filing of Income Tax Returns from 30th September, 2016 to 17th October, 2016
Public Undertakings can't act arbitrarily like private employers
By Saba	Published on June 1, 2017
Pat HC | Prevention of Corruption Act: Complaint against public servant requires prior sanction of the Competent Authority
By Devika	Published on April 10, 2019 April 18, 2019
Much reliance cannot be lent to photographs when eyewitnesses have not at all supported the prosecution case
By Saba	Published on September 15, 2017 September 28, 2017