Live
- NASA Tracks Five Giant Asteroids on Close Approach to Earth Today
- Pushpa 2 Hits ₹1000 Crore in 6 Days: How It Compares to Other Top Indian Films
- Vivo X200 and X200 Pro Launched in India: Price, Specifications, and Features
- Nitin Gadkari Admits Feeling Embarrassed at Global Summits Over Rising Road Accidents in India
- Comprehensive Review on Indiramma Housing Survey and Welfare Initiatives Conducted via Video Conference
- Jogulamba Temple Records Rs 1.06 Crore Hundi Revenue in 150 Days
- Opposition Slams ‘One Nation, One Election’ Bill as Anti-Democratic; BJP Allies Support the Move
- Celebrate Karthigai Maha Deepam Virtually with Sri Mandir’s LIVE Darshan Experience
- BJP Extends Support to Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan Employees' Strike, Demands Immediate Regularization and Welfare Benefits
- Dr. M. Priyanka Stresses Quality Education, Nutritious Meals, and Cleanliness in Schools
Supreme Court directs AP ryots to move apex council
A bench of Supreme Court headed by Justice Jagadish Singh Kehar here on Wednesday directed the farmers of Andhra Pradesh who a filed a petition against Palamuru-Rangareddy/ Dindi to approach the apex council.
​New Delhi: A bench of Supreme Court headed by Justice Jagadish Singh Kehar here on Wednesday directed the farmers of Andhra Pradesh who a filed a petition against Palamuru-Rangareddy/ Dindi to approach the apex council.
The petitioners contended that the proposed Telangana projects would adversely affect the interests of the Andhra farmers, downstream.
The proposed projects were illegal and had no sanction at all they said pointing out that a dispute was already raging between the two States over sharing of the river waters.
The three-judge bench which heard the petition on Wednesday said the petitioners should approach the apex council consisting of the Union Water Resources Minister, Uma Bharti and AP and Telangana State Chief Ministers, N Chandrababu Naidu and K Chandrasekhar Rao instead.
The apex council was constituted as per the provisions of the AP Reorganisation Act, 2014. The bench did not, however, comment on the maintainability of the petition.
