KWDT-II asks AP to file reply on SoC in four weeks or forfeit rights
The Tribunal-II made it categorically clear to AP that in case of failing to comply with the orders on this count within the stipulated (extended) period, AP would forfeit its right to file it in future and the Tribunal may proceed further with the case.
Hyderabad: Taking a serious view of the wait it was subjected to by Andhra Pradesh for filing its reply to the Statement of Case submitted by Telangana, the Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal-II on Monday gave a last chance to AP to file its counter within four weeks. The Tribunal-II (headed by Chairman Justice Brijesh Kumar, members Justice Rammohan Reddy and Justice Talapatra) made it categorically clear to AP that in case of failing to comply with the orders on this count within the stipulated (extended) period, AP would forfeit its right to file it in future and the Tribunal may proceed further with the case. The Tribunal did not appreciate the reasons cited by AP for the delay in filing the counter. It had attributed the delay in filing its reply to the Statement of Case (SoC) to the assembly election held recently and requested for four weeks to file it. The advocates representing AP pleaded that due to elections in the State, it could not prepare the reply to the SoC. The advocate general of the State has resigned with the change of government. So was the case with the advocates on record who represented the State.
Advocates appearing for Telangana, C S Vaidyanathan and V Ravinder Rao contended that AP was attending to cases filed in Supreme Court in respect of the Krishna water related issues regularly, but in the Tribunal, it was seeking postponement of issues. While allowing four weeks to AP for filing the counter, the Tribunal has finally allowed two weeks to both the States to file rejoinders to the counters if needed. The case is posted again to August 28 and 28. Telangana had filed its SoC well within the stipulated time frame and insisted AP to do so to avoid further delay in the proceeding of the tribunal which was tasked with the responsibility to decide on sharing of river water between the two States as per the ‘further terms of reference`’. (EOM)
