LexTHE STATE OF TAMIL NADU versus THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2026] 2 S.C.R. 285 : 2026 INSC 113 The State of Tamil Nadu v. The State of Karnataka & Anr. (Original Suit No. 1 of 2018) 02 February 2026 [Vikram Nath* and N.V. Anjaria, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Matter pertains to dispute as regards the sharing of the waters of the Pennaiyar River between the State of Tamil Nadu and the State of Karnataka. Headnotes† Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956 – ss.3, 4 – Inter- State River Pennaiyar – Dispute as regards the sharing of the waters of the Pennaiyar River and arising from the alleged construction of a check dam/diversion by the State of Karnataka-defendant-State on the said river, impeding the free flow of water, thereby depriving the State of Tamil Nadu-plaintiff-State of the benefits of the river waters flowing through the territories of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka and thereafter into Puducherry – Suit by the plaintiff-State against defendant-State and the Union of India seeking declaration that the said unilateral action of the defendant-State, illegal and violates the fundamental rights of the inhabitants of the plaintiff-State; grant permanent injunction restraining the defendant-State, from proceeding with the construction of Check Dam/diversion structure across the Pennaiyar river and its tributaries, and pumping water from them to the existing tanks in the Pennaiyar basin by the defendant-State; and other directions: Held: Pennaiyar River water dispute has been pending consideration before this Court since the year 2018 – Multiple efforts have been undertaken by the concerned stakeholders to bring about an amicable resolution of the dispute – However, the negotiation process has not yielded any mutually acceptable outcome – In view of the inability of the parties to arrive at a common settlement, * Author 286 [2026] 2 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports appropriate to call upon the Central Government to constitute a tribunal in terms of the statutory framework, so that the dispute may be adjudicated in accordance with law – In addition, the affidavit filed by the Union records that, during the ministerial- level negotiations, the plaintiff-State unequivocally conveyed that the Pennaiyar River water dispute ought to be resolved through adjudication by a Tribunal and in view thereof, the defendant no.2 took a decision to indefinitely defer the negotiation process – Thus, issuance of direction to the Central Government to issue an appropriate notification in the Official Gazette and to constitute a Water Disputes Tribunal for the adjudication of the inter se water dispute between the parties, within the one month from the date of judgment. [Paras 7-10] Case Law Cited T.N. Cauvery Neerppasana Vilaiporulgal Vivasayigal Nala Urimai Padhugappa Sangam v. Union of India [1990] 3 SCR 83 : (1990) 3 SCC 440 – referred to. List of Acts Constitution of India; Supreme Court Rules, 2013; Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956. List of Keywords Pennaiyar River; Inter-State River Pennaiyar dispute; Construction of check dam/diversion; Impeding free flow of water; Construction of Check Dam/ Anicut across Markandeyanadhi near Yargol village, Bangarapettai Taluk. Case Arising From CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Original Suit No. 1 of 2018 Original Suit has been instituted under Article 131 of the Constitution of India Appearances for Parties Advs. for the Plaintiff(s): V. Krishnamurthy AAG/Sr. Adv., P. Wilsson, N.R. Elango, G. Umapathy, Sr. Advs., Ms. Misha Rohatgi, Nakul Mohta, Amulya Upadhyay, Ayush Kashyap, Ms. Azka Sheikh Kalia, Sachin S. [2026] 2 S.C.R. 287 The State of Tamil Nadu v. The State of Karnataka & Anr. Adv. for the Defendant(s): Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G., Shashi Kiran Shetty, Advocate General, Shyam Divan, Mohan V Katarki, Sr. Advs., Ms. Chitrangda Rastravara, Pratyush Shrivastav, Sachin Sharma, Navanjay Mahapatra, Dr. N. Visakamurthy, Nishanth Patil, Mayank Jain, Ms. Addoorya Harish, Nishanth Patil. Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Judgment Vikram Nath, J. 1. The present suit has been instituted by the State of Tamil Nadu (hereinafter referred to as the “plaintiff-State”) invoking the original jurisdiction of this Court under Article 131 of the Constitution of India, read with Part III of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, against the State of Karnataka (hereinafter referred to as the “defendant-State”) and the Union of India (hereinafter referred to as “defendant no. 2”), praying, inter alia, the grant
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.