LexIN RE : NETWORKING OF RIVERS versus .
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A [2012] 1 S.C.R. 1118 "IN RE : NETWORKING OF RIVERS" (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 512 of 2002) FEBRUARY 27, 2012 [S.H. KAPADIA, CJI, A.K. PATNAIK AND 8 SWATANTER KUMAR, JJ.) CONSTITUTION OF IND/A, 1950: Art. 32 - Writ petitions seeking directions to Central and C State Governments for effective management of water by nationalisation and inter-linking of rivers - Held: Government of India has framed National Water Policy - Further, a National Perspective Plan has been formulated for optimum utilization of water resources in the country which envisaged 0 inter-basin transfer of water from water-surplus to water-deficit areas - River linking plan in its ultimate stage of development will also enable flood moderation - 30 links have been identified - Huge amounts of public money have been spent - These projects are to be completed with a sense of sincerity and a desire for its completion - Keeping in view the relative E economic and social needs of interested States, volume of stream and its uses, land not watered, and other relevant considerations, it will be for the expert bodies atone to examine on such issues and their impact on the project - Courts have their limitations to undertake such an exercise F within the scope of-its power of judicial review and even on the basis of expanded principles of public interest litigation - It will not only be desirable, but also inevitable that an appropriate body should be created to plan, construct and implement this inter-linking of rivers program for the benefit G of the nation as a whole - Union of India directed to constitute a Committee to be called a 'Special Committee for Inter- linking of Rivers' with the composition as suggested in the judgment - The Committee so constituted shall take such steps as specified in the judgment and submit reports to the H 1118 "IN RE: NETWORKING OF RIVERS" 1119 Cabinet of the Government of India - Central and the State A Governments concerned directed to comply with the directions contained in the judgment effectively and expeditiously - Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956 - River Boards Act, 1956 - Public interest litigation - Judicial review - Sepration of powers. B Art. 262, Seventh Schedule, List I, Entries 56, and 97, List II, Entry 17 and List Ill, Entry 20 - Adjudication of disputes relating to waters of intercState rivers - Inter-linking of rivers - Held: By and large, there is unanimity in accepting interlinking of rivers but the reservations of the States concerned can also C not be ignored, being relatable to their particular economic, geographical and socio-economic needs - These are matters which squarely fall within the domain of general consensus and, thus, require a framework to be formulated by the competent Government or the Legislature, as the case may D be, prior to its execution - By virtue of Art. 262 read with Entries 56 and 97 of List I Entry 17 of List II and Entry 20 of List Ill, Parliament gets wide field of legislation relatable to various subjects, including regulation and development of inter-State rivers and to create adjudicatory mechanism. E In the instant writ petitions filed in public interest, directions were sought against the Central Government and the State Governments concerned for effective management of water resources by nationalization and interlinking of rivers in the country. Notice was issued F to all the States and the Attorney General for India inviting their stance on the issue of networking of rivers. On 31.10.2002, the Court recorded that there was, in principle, consensus amongst all the States to go ahead with the project of interlinking of rivers. A high level Task G Force was set up. Feasibility Reports (FRs) were prepared for the intended links. A total number of 30 links were identified: 16 under the peninsular river development component and 14 under the Himalayan river development component. FRs of 16 links were placed on H 1120 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2012] 1 S.C.R. A the website. The status report filed on behalf of the Government of India showed that a committee of environmentalists, social activists and other experts would be constituted to be involved in the consultative process of formulation and execution of the entire B project. The status reports filed from time to time were considered by the Court. Disposing of the writ petitions, connected IAs and the contempt petitions, the Court
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.