Thursday, 25 April 2024

 

 

LATEST NEWS When the Congress government came, 50% reservation to women and MSP to farmers : Anuma Acharya AAP’s hard hitting attack on Channi: Post 1st June you will be arrested Manish Tiwari will win by a Huge margin: Jarnail Singh Amman is back with Romantic Track 'Dil Kare' Congress is working to divide the country in the name of religion and caste: Dr. Subhash Sharma PM Modi synonymous with trust, hope, credibility: Devender Singh Rana Atal Dulloo reviews the working & Public Outreach activities of Information Department General, Police Observer interact with Zonal, Sectoral Magistrates, BLOs of district Reasi Div Com Jammu, ADGP visit Rajouri, review preparations for elections Lt Governor addresses seminar on National Education Policy 2020 at Ghazipur DC Bandipora Shakeel ul Rehman Rather reviews Floriculture, Fisheries, Sericulture Departments DC Bandipora Shakeel ul Rehman Rather reviews performance of AHD DC Bandipora Shakeel ul Rehman Rather reviews Agriculture Sector DEO Bandipora Shakeel ul Rehman Rather inspects EVM, material strong room DEO Bandipora Shakeel ul Rehman Rather reviews poll preparedness Harnit Singh Sudan (IAS 2023) Interacts with IAS/JKAS Aspirants Marathon under SVEEP held at Samba to maximize voter awareness DEO Kupwara reviews transportation of polling staff, EVMs DEO Kulgam flags-off cycle rally under SVEEP to raise voter awareness 5 more candidates file nominations for Srinagar Lok Sabha seat TV Serial Actor Abhinav Shukla Net Worth 2024 | 5 Dariya News

 

Agreements between Madras Presidency, princely Mysore in public interest : Supreme Court

Listen to this article

Web Admin

Web Admin

5 Dariya News

New Delhi , 16 Feb 2018

The Supreme Court on Friday rejected Karnataka's contention that 1892 and 1924 agreements between British-ruled Madras Presidency and the princely state of Mysore could not have been the basis of a tribunal award as they were thrust on Mysore which could not bargain.Describing the 1892 and 1924 agreements as in "larger public interest with no political elements", the bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice Amitavsa Roy and Justice A.M. Khanwilkar, hearing the appeals against the 2007 award of the Cauvery Water Tribunal, said that at no stage after the reorganisation of the states in 1956, did Karnataka ever object to them.The judgment said that the two agreements were not political arrangements but covered "the areas of larger public interest which do not have any political element and in this backdrop, the agreements are neither inoperative nor completely extinct".

Even if Karnataka's contention that Mysore did not have the bargaining power at the time of entering 1892 and 1924 agreements were to be accepted, the court said: "... Karnataka acquired the said bargaining power after the 1947 Act, and definitely after coming into force the Constitution of India" and "chose not to denounce" them."Therefore, the said agreements cannot be said to be unconscionable," the judgment said."The newly-formed states never belied the agreements of 1892 and 1924 after the Reorganization Act, 1956. Ergo, both the agreements remained in force despite coming into effect of the Reorganization Act, 1956," it maintained.A perusal of the 1924 Agreement, the court said, "reveals that the said Agreement was never intended to be of permanent character. On the contrary, it contemplated a fixed term of 50 years", and expired in 1974.

 

Tags: Supreme Court

 

 

related news

 

 

 

Photo Gallery

 

 

Video Gallery

 

 

5 Dariya News RNI Code: PUNMUL/2011/49000
© 2011-2024 | 5 Dariya News | All Rights Reserved
Powered by: CDS PVT LTD