Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library

Supreme Court Judgments

Latest Supreme Court of India Judgments 2023


RSS Feed img

State of Orissa Vs. Government of India & ANR.


1. IA Nos. 4 and 5 have been filed in this disposed of matter by the State of Andhra Pradesh and the Union of India.

2. IA 4 has been filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh for a direction upon the Union of India to take steps to appoint the Chairman of the Tribunal to consider the water disputes between the States of Andhra Pradesh and Orissa with regard to the sharing of the waters of river Vansadhara.

3. From a letter addressed to the Registrar of this Court by the learned advocate for the petitioner on 6th instant, it appears that the Chairman of the "Vansadhara Water Dispute Tribunal" has since been appointed. Such prayer made on behalf of the State of Andhra Pradesh, therefore, stands satisfied. However, the second part of prayer (a) on the basis whereof the Union of India was directed to provide the necessary infrastructure for the Tribunal to function, has not yet been complied with and a prayer has been made in I.A.No.5 filed by the Union of India in the month of February, 2011, for three months' time to provide the same. The prayer made on behalf of the State of Andhra Pradesh is duly supported by the State of Orissa and Mr. Raju Ramachandran, learned senior advocate, has in fact made a prayer that the directions are made peremptory.

4. Having considered the submissions made on behalf of the parties and in particular those made by Mr. Jain, learned ASG, appearing for the UOI, who assures us that the infrastructural facilities will be provided within the month of July, 2011, we allow both the applications and direct that all infrastructural facilities to enable the Tribunal to function properly and effectively be provided by the Union of India by 31st July, 2011, and the Chairman of the Tribunal be informed accordingly within 16th July, 2011.

5. We also make it clear that if any prayer is made to the Hon'ble Chairman for interim orders and if he is in a position to consider the same, he may do so upon notice to all the parties.

6. Both the IAs are allowed and disposed of.

..................J. (ALTAMAS KABIR)

..................J. (CYRIAC JOSEPH)


April 08, 2011.

Latest Supreme Court Judgments Back

Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys