Delhi/Hyderabad, Jan 5 (Maxim News) : The long running water dispute between Telangana and Andhra Pradesh reached the Supreme Court on Monday, with Telangana filing a petition over the Polavaram and Mallanna Sagar projects. The apex court heard arguments from both states and later adjourned the matter to the 12th of this month.
The Telangana government approached the Supreme Court objecting to the Polavaram Mallanna Sagar project. During the hearing, lawyers representing Andhra Pradesh and Telangana presented detailed arguments before the bench.
Senior advocate Jagadish Gupta, appearing for Andhra Pradesh, told the court that the Polavaram project report and related studies had central approval. He also argued that Telangana was constructing several projects on the Godavari river.
Responding to these submissions, the Chief Justice of India observed that the views of all basin states must be considered. He suggested that the dispute could also be resolved through mediation. The court then decided to defer further hearing.
Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, representing the Telangana government, argued that Andhra Pradesh was claiming to use only flood waters. However, he said water usage could not go beyond allocated limits. He also told the court that many complex issues were linked to the matter.
Singhvi pointed out that Telangana is a newly formed state after bifurcation and that several projects are still under construction. He also informed the court about a committee appointed by the Centre after Telangana filed the petition.
After hearing both sides, the Supreme Court raised key questions. The bench asked Telangana why it was seeking intervention when a committee was already in place. The court observed that the committee should be allowed to submit a report on all aspects. The judges also questioned whether the Supreme Court had the power to stay proceedings in a civil suit.
Singhvi sought interim relief on behalf of Telangana. In response, the Chief Justice said Andhra Pradesh was only calling tenders for preparing a project report. He added that the Centre has jurisdiction over national projects.
Andhra Pradesh’s counsel Mukul Rohatgi questioned why there should be objections to preparing a project report for a future project. He argued that a state has the right to plan projects within its territory.
He said the proposal aimed to supply water to drought prone areas of Rayalaseema and claimed there were no violations of any orders or judgments.
The Chief Justice, however, stressed that objections of riparian states must be considered. The court then adjourned the hearing. (Maxim News)
Now you can get the latest stories from Indtoday on Telegram every day. Click the link to subscribe. Click to follow Indtoday’s Facebook page, Twitter, and Instagram. For all the latest Hyderabad News updates
