Media Release
 

Panaji, Nov 24: Shantaram Naik M P has requested the union minister for water resources Pawan Kumar Bansal that the centre should incorporate terms of reference to the notification, issued by it, appointing tribunal for Mhadei river dispute.

It may be recalled that the centre has issued a notification for constituting Tribunal under the chairmanship of justice J M Panchal , justice Vinay Mittal of Madhya Pradesh high court and justice P S Narayana  former Judge of Andra Pradesh high court, being the two other members.

In a letter written by MP to Mr Bansal, Naik stated that Goa is not demanding any share in the water and  as such,  there is no “water dispute”  existing between the states in that sense. Goa is basically opposed to the project on grounds that the project, if completed,  would destroy the ecology of the state and would constitute a dangerous environmental hazard, he stated.

In these circumstances, one of the fundamental terms of reference in this case has to be whether the Karnataka government should be permitted to construct the project, Naik questioned in the letter.

"I have gone through the notification dated November 16, 2010, issued by the Central Government under section 4 of the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act,1956 and it does not contain any terms of reference.  If the centre is of the opinion that the tribunal should frame the issues, then the tribunal may or may not frame an issue on the need to construct the project as, the notification mentions that “Central Government is of the opinion that the water dispute relating to the inter-state river mahadayi and the river valley thereof cannot be settled by negotiations…” which indicates that that there is “water dispute”, Mr Naik stated.

Naik has, therefore, requested that the centre should frame terms of reference to take care of the Goa’s stand, requesting the tribunal to go into the aspect whether Karnataka should be permitted to construct the project in the light of the contention of Goa.

In case the Central Government is of the opinion that the matter should addressed only through the process of framing the issues, by the tribunal itself, then, the notification dated November 16 needs to be amended to give scope to the framing of such an issue, Naik adds in his letter.