Team Herald
JANPATH, (NEW DELHI): Replying to the interlocutory application (IA) filed by Goa with regard to the diversion of water by Karnataka, the neighbouring State has taken strong objection to the alleged statements made by Goa WRD Minister Vinod Palyekar.
“Palyekar has exceeded the limits when he called Kannadigas harami,” says the reply submitted by Karnataka, copy of which is in possession of Herald.
Further, it says, “Karnataka files this short reply with affidavit seeking dismissal of IA no 74 of 2018 (application seeking necessary orders/directions and other reliefs on behalf of applicant/complainant state of Goa) with exemplary and punitive cost, since the allegations in the applications are vague and baseless both in fact and law and more pertinently, the very filing of the application is an abuse of the process of this hon’ble tribunal because it is intended to give gloss to the fascist and divisive statement of Vinod Palyekar, Minister for Water Resources, and to create a prejudice to the case of Karnataka at this crucial stage of final hearing.”
The reply adds, that Karnataka in written submission dated 15/01/2018 enclosed the press report and referred to fascist and divisive statements made by Palyekar.
“Despite the fascist remarks Karnataka has not blocked the public access to the canal with several Goa politicians, including Speaker Pramod Sawant and Dy Speaker Michael Lobo and MLAs visiting the site of work,” the reply states, adding, “The work near regulator is actually work for cleaning the silt and no diversion as alleged by Goa is being carried out.”
Further, Karnataka submits that the IA is not maintainable by law. “None of the orders of the tribunal dated 16/10/12, 19/03/13, 21/08/13, 17/04/2014 and 27/07/2016 have been notified and made effective under Sec 6(1) of the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act 1956. Therefore no application can be moved based on alleged violations of said orders,” the reply states.
Karanataka also questioned the powers of the Tribunal on such IA, “considering the orders are enforceable, the tribunal has no jurisdiction to initiate proceedings against any official as it is neither a court having powers to punish nor any powers are conferred on tribunal. Even the contempt of court Act 1971, does not vest any powers in hon’ble tribunal.”
On the allegations that Karnataka has changed the nature of flow of water Karnataka says it is “ridiculous and baseless”.
