'Hope wisdom prevails on both states for peace', says Supreme Court on Cauvery water dispute.
New Delhi:
The Supreme Court today took Karnataka and Tamil Nadu governments to task for failing to check violence following its order on the Cauvery dispute, asserting that its verdict "has to be complied with" and "violent agitation" would serve no purpose as those aggrieved were free to take legal recourse.
Asserting that the people cannot take law into their hands, the top court directed the two states to ensure there is no violence, agitation, destruction and damage to properties following its order on Cauvery water sharing and asked them to maintain peace, calm and dignity for law.
"We are compelled to state that it is the duty of both the states (Tamil Nadu and Karnataka) to see that no violence, agitation or destruction of properties takes place," a bench of Justices Dipak Misra and UU Lalit said, adding "we sincerely hope that wisdom shall prevail on competent authorities of both the states and that peace will prevail."
The bench also warned that "when there is court order, there should not be any violent agitations and any party aggrieved has the liberty to take legal recourse for mitigation of their grievances."
"We reiterate neither any strike nor bandh or agitation can take place when the court has passed an order and it has to be complied with. In any difficulty, concerned parties can approach the court and people cannot take law unto themselves.
It is the obligation of both the states to prevent such actions," the bench said referring to its 2009 judgement which had laid down guidelines to deal with situations of violence and destruction of properties by protestors and agitators.
"We expect both the states to maintain peace, calm, harmony and dignity for law", the bench said.
The top court, which posted the hearing on September 20 on the plea for direction to both states to take preventive measures and assessing the damages to public and private properties during agitation, said it will also take up the main matter of Cauvery water dispute.