Legislature, cannot by a mere declaration, directly overrule, reverse or override a judicial order and decision
The resolution passed by the two Houses of Karnataka Assembly on September 23 on Cauvery water to deny Tamil Nadu its share is merely an ill-advised misadventure, feels legal experts.
The resolution is no match for the constitutional might of the Supreme Court.
Apex Court is the final and sole arbiter of all the Intra-State and Inter-State water disputes.
Retd. Supreme Court judge, Justice K.T. Thomas said that at its best, the resolution can be treated as an expression of opinion or a criticism of the Supreme Court order. Like everyone has the right to criticise a court order so Assembly followed the common practice. But Supreme Court is legally the final authority in resolving inter-State water disputes,” Justice Thomas said.
Karnataka was caught on a wrong footing when the Supreme Court flexed its constitutional muscle and declined to entertain senior advocate Fali Nariman’s objections for Karnataka against releasing 6,000 cusecs of Cauvery water to Tamil Nadu for three days.
When Adv. Nariman pointed that it was “not possible” to obey the Supreme Court order against the wishes of the State Legislature expressed in the Resolution, the Bench of Justices Dipak Misra and U.U. Lalit retorted Karnataka to release the water “despite the resolution”.
Justice Thomas also referred to Article 144 of the Constitution of India to note that the Supreme Court even has power to summon the Army to aid it in implementing a judicial order.
Related News @ LatestLaws.in-