PM can't intervene in inter-state water dispute, says BJP

July 29, 2016

Bengaluru, Jul 29: The state BJP?on Thursday said that Prime Minister cannot intervene in an inter-state water dispute unless the riparian states come to a consensus and agree to sit across the table to resolve the dispute.

BJPThe BJP's defensive stand come at a time when there is a feeling among the agitating people of North Karnataka that the state would have got its due share of the Mahadayi waters had Prime Minister Narendra Modi intervened and resolved the issue.

Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Assembly Jagadish?Shettar said the state government should focus on fighting the legal battle on the Mahadayi dispute rather then seeking Prime Minister's intervention.

“The government is trying to give the entire issue a political angle by putting the blame on the Prime Minister. The government wanted the Prime Minister?to intervene even when the Tribunal proceedings were on. The government failed to make proper submission before the Tribunal resulting in a setback to the state,” the BJP?leader said.

The Mahadayi Water Disputes Tribunal on Wednesday rejected the state's plea seeking permission to utilise 7 tmcft from the Mahadayi river.

BJP?legislator and former Water Resources Minister Basavaraj Bommai said the Tribunal order is full of flaws. The government should file a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court to challenge the order. The Tribunal has erred as it had not considered the assessment done by the Central?Water Commission on water yield in the Mahadayi river. Besides, the state had applied for necessary environment clearances to build barrages across Kalasa and Banduri, the two tributaries of the Mahadayi river, to divert 7 tmcft to the Malaprabha river. This aspect had not been considered by the Tribunal, he said.

“All doors are not closed as the Tribunal is yet to pronounce its final award,” Bommai said.

Speaker's view

Speaker K?B?Koliwad felt that intervention by the Prime Minister had become the need of the hour. “The Congress, the BJP and the JD(S) should forget their political differences and work towards the welfare of the people,” he said.

Koliwad, MLA from Ranabennur in the North Karnataka district of Haveri, said it would be easier for Modi to convince the Goa and Maharashtra governments for an out-of-tribunal settlement to resolve the dispute as the BJP was in power in these two states.

Modi should step in: Navalgund MLA

At a time when Navalgund in Dharwad district was burning on Thursday with people taking to the streets over the Mahadayi issue, Navalgund MLA N?H?Konaraddi of the JD(S) was busy addressing a press conference in?Bengaluru.

Konaraddi said intervention by Prime Minister Narendra Modi was the only way justice could be rendered to the people of North Karnataka. “Filing an appeal before the Tribunal or approaching the Supreme Court will only further delay the people of north Karnataka getting their due share of the Mahadayi waters,” the MLA said. He said all the MPs from the state should take up the issue with the Prime Minister at the earliest.

Comments

s
 - 
Sunday, 31 Jul 2016

basically modi will not do anything and these people will not let SM anything

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
coastaldigest.com news network
May 22,2020

It has been 33 years since the night of 22 May, 1987 when nearly 50 Muslim men from Hashimpura, a settlement in Meerut were rounded up and packed into the rear of a truck of the Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC), an armed police of Uttar Pradesh. It was the blessed month of Ramadan and all the Muslims were fasting.

That night 42 of those on board the truck were killed in two massacres in neighbouring Ghaziabad district. One along the Upper Ganga canal near Muradnagar, the other along the Hindon canal in Makanpur, on the border with Delhi.

The cops had returned home after dumping the dead bodies into the canal. A few days later, the dead bodies were found floating in the canal and a case of murder was registered. 

Vir Bahadur Singh was the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh and Rajiv Gandhi was the prime minister of India when this incident took place. 

Not much has changed for the survivors and the relatives of the victims even today. The wounds are still fresh. Hashimpura remains devoid of basic municipal amenities, the erring silence on the narrow lanes of the locality amid the activities of a daily life speaks of the horror of the fateful day in 1987.

The massacre was the result of one among the many outcomes of the decision taken by the Rajiv Gandhi government to open the locks of Babri Masjid. After a month of rioting, the situation was tense in various parts of Meerut, and a lot spilled over in the nearby areas.

Timeline

May 22, 1987

Nearly 50 Muslims picked up by the PAC personnel from Hashimpura village in Meerut, Uttar Pradesh.
Victims later shot and bodies thrown into a canal. 42 persons declared dead.

1988

UP government orders CB-CID probe in the case.

February 1994

CB-CID submits inquiry report indicting over 60 PAC and police personnel of all ranks.

May 20, 1996

Charge sheet filed against 19 accused before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad by CB-CID of Uttar Pradesh police. 161 people listed as witnesses.

September 2002

Case transferred to Delhi by the Supreme Court on a petition by the families of victims and survivors.

July 2006

Delhi court frames charges of murder, attempt to murder, tampering with evidence and conspiracy under the IPC against 17 accused.

March 8, 2013

Trial court dismisses Subramanian Swamy's plea seeking probe into the alleged role of P Chidambaram, then Minister of State for Home, in the matter.

January 22, 2015

Trial court reserves judgement.

March 21, 2015

Court acquits 16 surviving accused giving them benefit of doubt regarding their identity.

May 18, 2015

Trial court decision challenged in the Delhi HC by the victims' families and eyewitnesses who survived the incident.

May 29, 2015

HC issues notice to the 16 PAC personnel on Uttar Pradesh government's appeal against the trial court verdict.

December 2015

National Human Rights Commission is impleaded in the matter. NHRC also seeks further probe into the massacre.

February 17, 2016

HC tags Swamy's appeal with the other petitions in the matter.

September 6, 2018

Delhi HC reserves verdict in the case.

October 31, 2018

Delhi HC convicts 16 former PAC personnel for life after finding them guilty of the murder of 42 people.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 4,2020

Mangalore, Feb 4: Following the directions of the University Grants Commission (UGC) to use khadi for convocations and other events in universities and colleges, Mangalore University has decided to use khadi-silk for ceremonial robes.

The amendments to the statute governing convocations for conferring degrees were approved in the Academic Council meeting.

Mangalore University Registrar Prof A M Khan said on Tuesday that the colour of the gown of the chancellor will be rich dark red or vermilion and the ‘angavasthram’ will be of gold with blue border.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 21,2020

Mangaluru, May 21: The Supreme Court has awarded Rs 7.64 crore compensation to the next of kin of a man who was killed in a crash-landing of Air India Express Flight 812 from Dubai in Mangalore on May 22, 2010. The accident killed 158 out of 166 passengers on board.

The family of the 45-year-old Mahendra Kodkany, which include his wife, daughter and son, were earlier granted Rs 7.35 crore as compensation by National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC). This compensation will now get enhanced after adding 9 per cent interest per annum (on the amount yet to be paid), to be paid by Air India.

Kodkany was the regional director for the Middle East for a UAE-based company. The aircraft overshot the runway and went down a hillside and burst into flames.

A bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Ajay Rastogi said: "The total amount payable on account of the aforesaid heads works out to Rs 7,64,29,437. Interest at the rate of nine per cent per annum shall be paid on the same basis as has been awarded by the NCDRC. The balance, if any, that remains due and payable to the complainants, after giving due credit for the amount which has already been paid, shall be paid within a period of two months."

The apex court noted that in a claim for compensation arising out of the death of an employee, the income has to be assessed on the basis of the entitlement of the employee. The top court said: "We are unable to accept the reasons which weighed with the NCDRC in making a deduction of AED (UAE currency) 30,000 from the total CTC. Similarly, and for the same reason, we are unable to accept the submission of Air India that the transport allowance should be excluded. The bifurcation of the salary into diverse heads may be made by the employer for a variety of reasons."

The top court observed that the deceased was evidently, a confirmed employee of his employer. "We have come to the conclusion that thirty per cent should be allowed on account of future prospects", added the court.

The top court noted that if the amount which has been paid by Air India is in excess of the payable under the present judgement, "we direct under Article 142 of the Constitution (discretionary powers) that the excess shall not be recoverable from the claimants," said the court.

Comments

A.Rahman
 - 
Friday, 22 May 2020

First of all  A Salute To Lawyer One Who Handled This Case Against Carriers Mismanagement Wrong Action.

 

Sure this is the second victory for the lawyer against arriers mismanagement.

 

Over all it is the sign  of a profesional ; qualified  eligble  lawyers efforts and right decision from a capable knowlegable judge. Suit case operating lawyers cannot handle such specilized cases.

They lawyer may handled rest of the vicitms cases or he not. But for his siincere efforts for the past ten years delcares whatn he  is. Am personally met him and  witnessed his court appearance  hope and wish him all the best and success .

 

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.