Case not adversarial, identify core issues: SC

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Tuesday said the litigation pertaining to 126-year-old Mullaperiyar dam is not “adversarial” as this is a PIL in the sense that safety, security and health issues of the people staying around the dam are involved in the matter.

A bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar told the advocates appearing for the respective parties in the matter that they should assist it in identifying the “core issues” which needs to be addressed by the court.

Mullaperiyar dam was built in 1895 on the Periyar river in Idukki district of Kerala.

The bench, also comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and C T Ravikumar, noted that advocates appearing in the matter have agreed to have a joint meeting to identify the core issues that need to be addressed by the top court in these proceedings.

“They (advocates) have assured the court that they will articulate the issues on which there is consensus and also the issues on which there is difference of opinion and submit a note in that regard before the next date of hearing,” the bench said.

When one of the lawyers raised the issue pertaining to seepage data, the bench said it has to be first decided what are the core issues that the court needs to answer in these proceedings.

The apex court said management of water level in the dam is a matter for which an expert committee has already been appointed by the court and safety of the dam is also a related issue which has to be addressed by the panel.

The bench observed that this is not an “adversarial litigation”.

“This is a public interest litigation in the sense that safety and security and health issues are involved of the persons staying around that dam. Therefore, all of you should help us in identifying the core issues which we need to answer in the judicial side. We are not sitting here to do administration of the dam,” the bench orally said.

The top court, while posting the matter for hearing in the second week of February, said the written note be submitted on or before February 4.

THE BENCH SAID IT HAS TO BE FIRST DECIDED WHAT ARE THE CORE ISSUES THAT THE COURT NEEDS TO ANSWER IN THESE PROCEEDINGS