Centre’s stand a blow to Telangana, AP

Says no need for relook into Krishna water share

• Post bifurcation TS govt sought justice in sharing of Krishna water
• The Centre was supposed to act within a year on the issue
• After Centre failed to act, TS govt filed a writ petition seeking a fresh allocation of Krishna water or a new tribunal
• SC asked the TS govt whether it would withdraw its petition if the Centre agreed to hear its plea afresh
• TS govt counsel said he would react only after he went through the order

New Delhi: The stand of the Centre on Krishna water share comes as a huge blow to both the Telugu States. Going by the oral submission made by the Counsel (Additional Solicitor-General) representing the Centre, Tushar Mehta, in the Krishna Waters Dispute case here on Tuesday, the Centre does not feel that there is a need to relook into the issue.

The two States would do well to share the united AP's quota between themselves without disturbing the existing arrangement. Telangana Government had lodged a 'complaint' with the Supreme Court after bifurcation of the State last year regarding the injustice done to Telangana as far as sharing of Krishna water is concerned. On July 14 last year, Telangana Minister T Harish Rao lodged the complaint under Section 3 of the 1956 Inter State Water Disputes Act stating that Telangana had been facing injustice from the very beginning on the water share.

As the complaint was filed as a partner State in the Krishna basin, the Centre was supposed to act within a year on the issue. Section 4 of the said Act states that if this is not done in a year, the complaining State's contention would have to be taken cognizance of and the dispute settled accordingly. When the Centre did not act within a year on the complaint the Telangana Government invoked the Water Disputes Act (Section 4) and filed a writ petition seeking a fresh allocation of Krishna water or a new tribunal.

The Supreme Court clubbed this writ petition with the ones already pending with it - Karnataka petition on loss of 4 TMC water to it in the Brijesh Kumar's final order, united AP's petition seeking not to include the earlier Brijesh Kumar order in the Gazette (here AP got a slightly higher allocation), AP's petition after bifurcation complaining that its allocation had come down in the final order of the Brijesh Kumar.

Telangana again filed an SLP countering the argument of Maharashtra and Karnataka to argue that Telangana should not be viewed as a baby born out of bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh but as a fourth baby born in the Krishna Basin and continued its arguments on these lines all along.

It said Telangana arugument was not heard by any court nor Tribunal so far. Hence, either there should be a new tribunal for four States or the Brijesh Kumar tribunal continuing then should hear the case afresh. The Supreme Court, which had asked the Centre to clarify its position in August, issued a notice to the Centre in October and asked it to clarify its position by December 3.

On December 3, the court relented and gave time till today (December 8) to the Centre to come out with its stand. The court had even asked the Telangana Government whether it would withdraw its petition if the Centre was agreeable to hear its plea afresh and treat the case as a dispute among the four States.

The SC had issued the notice to the Centre to clarify its stand on this last petition first as it was crucial to the further hearing of the complaints of other States.

Telangana Government's counsel, Vaidyanathan, said as the submission was not made in writing he was in no position to react and would do so only after he went through the contents when it would be submitted.