New Delhi, In the Supreme Court, perhaps in the first case of its kind, both the judges of the two-judge bench have withdrawn from the hearing. The matter is related to the Krishna River Water issue. There is a dispute between Karnataka, Maharashtra, Telangana and Andhra Pradesh over the water of the river. The matter was being heard by a bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and AS Bopanna. Of these, Chandrachud belongs to Maharashtra and Bopanna belongs to Karnataka. That is why both withdrew their names from the bench.
According to reports, Justice Chandrachud has taken this decision after consulting his fellow judge Justice Bopanna. In this regard, Justice Chandrachud said, ‘We do not want to be accused of being biased.’ Justice Bopanna has also agreed with this. According to the newspaper, this could be a reason. But there is another reason for this, which speaks of the sensitivity of the matter. It is said that a few days before the hearing of the case related to the Krishna river water dispute, both the judges had received a large number of emails and letters. In this, allegations were being made by citing their home states that they can discriminate with their state in hearing and decision.
The Times of India has confirmed this development from a judge. He has described his experience as ‘horrifying’. According to the news, both the judges of the Supreme Court have raised special objections on the language of e-mails and letters. They feared that whatever the verdict might be, they might have to face dire consequences in the future. Both the judges were hearing the matter everyday. Now after his removal, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court will constitute a new bench. She will further hear the matter related to the Krishna river water-sharing.
how old is the controversy
The dispute over the water of the Krishna river started between the princely states of Hyderabad and Mysuru. But at present it is about 14 years old. United Andhra Pradesh (now Telangana also) had taken this matter to the Supreme Court. He alleged that Karnataka was using the water of Krishna river more than its allotted share. It doesn’t even give any information about how much water he has used. While Karnataka’s argument is that the water of the river should flow into the sea, it is better to use it for irrigation etc. Maharashtra also uses water from Krishna. Therefore he is also a party.
Tags: Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Krishna, Maharashtra, Supreme Court, Telangana