Tweet
1 tribunal for water dispute on cards?
Considering the dismal record of different Water Dispute Tribunals, the Union Ministry of Water Resources (MoWR) has decided to amend the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956 — notably to replace all tribunals with a single one.
“We are preparing amendments charter for the Act to replace all tribunals with a single one. That will mean that we have just one tribunal which will be based in Delhi. Apart from that, we have decided to fix a retirement age for the tribunal judges at 60,” Dhruv Vijai Singh, Secretary of Ministry of Water Resources, told The Pioneer. Till now, there was no age bar for the tribunal judges to retire.
The Water Dispute Tribunals have had a dismal track record. Even after more than 25 years, the Ravi-Beas River Waters Tribunal, set up in 1986, has not decided the matter. Similar is the fate of Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal - set up in 1996 and Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal - set up in 2004.
Singh said that the idea is to reform the Act in a manner that disputes are settled in a time-bound manner with minimum resources. The single tribunal would have to decide every dispute within a maximum of two years, which could be extended by one year in some unwarranted circumstances. Also, the amendments talk of giving a quasi-judicial status to the tribunal which will mean that the decision of the tribunal will have the force of a decree or order of the Supreme Court.
Currently, there are five tribunals in India: Ravi-Beas dispute between Haryana, Rajasthan and Punjab; Krishna dispute between Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh; Cauvery dispute between Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Pondicherry and Kerala; Vansdhara dispute between Andhra Pradesh and Orissa; and the Mahedyi dispute between Karnataka, Maharashtra and Goa. With a single tribunal, the Government would be able to provide one-stop forum to deal with all inter-state water disputes in the country.
The Ministry has started inter-ministerial consultations about the amendments in the Act and might move the amendment Bill in the next session of Parliament.
Considering the dismal record of different Water Dispute Tribunals, the Union Ministry of Water Resources (MoWR) has decided to amend the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956 — notably to replace all tribunals with a single one.
“We are preparing amendments charter for the Act to replace all tribunals with a single one. That will mean that we have just one tribunal which will be based in Delhi. Apart from that, we have decided to fix a retirement age for the tribunal judges at 60,” Dhruv Vijai Singh, Secretary of Ministry of Water Resources, told The Pioneer. Till now, there was no age bar for the tribunal judges to retire.
The Water Dispute Tribunals have had a dismal track record. Even after more than 25 years, the Ravi-Beas River Waters Tribunal, set up in 1986, has not decided the matter. Similar is the fate of Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal - set up in 1996 and Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal - set up in 2004.
Singh said that the idea is to reform the Act in a manner that disputes are settled in a time-bound manner with minimum resources. The single tribunal would have to decide every dispute within a maximum of two years, which could be extended by one year in some unwarranted circumstances. Also, the amendments talk of giving a quasi-judicial status to the tribunal which will mean that the decision of the tribunal will have the force of a decree or order of the Supreme Court.
Currently, there are five tribunals in India: Ravi-Beas dispute between Haryana, Rajasthan and Punjab; Krishna dispute between Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh; Cauvery dispute between Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Pondicherry and Kerala; Vansdhara dispute between Andhra Pradesh and Orissa; and the Mahedyi dispute between Karnataka, Maharashtra and Goa. With a single tribunal, the Government would be able to provide one-stop forum to deal with all inter-state water disputes in the country.
The Ministry has started inter-ministerial consultations about the amendments in the Act and might move the amendment Bill in the next session of Parliament.
