query: who has been appointed the new chairman of cauvery water dispute tribunal

pos: Kaveri River water dispute as per the provisions in the Cauvery Management Scheme laid down by the Supreme Court. Central Water Commission chairman, S. Masood Hussain will head the CWMA and chief engineer of the Central Water Commission, Navin Kumar will be the first chairman of the CWRC. While the CWMA is an umbrella body, the CWRC will monitor water management on a day-to-day basis, including the water level and inflow and outflow of reservoirs in all the basin states. Kaveri River water dispute The sharing of waters of the Kaveri River (also spelled as Cauvery) has been the source of a serious conflict

pos: Kaveri River water dispute as per the provisions in the Cauvery Management Scheme laid down by the Supreme Court. Central Water Commission chairman, S. Masood Hussain will head the CWMA and chief engineer of the Central Water Commission, Navin Kumar will be the first chairman of the CWRC. While the CWMA is an umbrella body, the CWRC will monitor water management on a day-to-day basis, including the water level and inflow and outflow of reservoirs in all the basin states. Kaveri River water dispute The sharing of waters of the Kaveri River (also spelled as Cauvery) has been the source of a serious conflict

pos: Kaveri Nadu and sought to settle the protracted water dispute between the two sout. On June 22 2018, Despite opposition from Karnataka, the Central government constituted the Cauvery Water Regulation Committee as per the provisions in the Cauvery Management Scheme laid down by the Supreme Court. Central Water Commission chairman, S. Masood Hussain will head the CWMA and chief engineer of the Central Water Commission, Navin Kumar will be the first chairman of the CWRC. While the CWMA is an umbrella body, the CWRC will monitor water management on a day-to-day basis, including the water level and inflow and outflow of

neg: Law Commission of India as the New chairman of the 20th Law Commission of India in place of D.K Jain who has taken over as president National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Shah has a three-year tenure and has been saddled with a wide terms of reference including one to examine existing laws from the gender equality perspective and suggest necessary amendments. Justice Balbir Singh Chauhan, a former judge of the Supreme Court was appointed Chairman of the 21st Law Commission on 10 March. This post was lying vacant since September 2015. 66-year old Justice Chauhan is currently heading the Cauvery River Water Disputes Tribunal.

neg: Kaveri River water dispute October (22), November (15), December (8), January (3), February (2.5), March (2.5), April (2.5) and May (2.5). The Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, unhappy with the decision, filed a revision petition before the tribunal seeking a review. On 19 September 2012, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who is also the Chairman of the "Cauvery River Authority", directed Karnataka to release 9,000 cusecs of Cauvery water to Tamil Nadu at Biligundlu (the border) daily. But Karnataka felt that this was impractical due to the drought conditions prevailing because of the failed monsoon. Karnataka then walked out of the high-level meeting as a sign

neg: Kerala House community in Delhi and adjacent area. Central office of padana Kendra is established at Travancore Palace. Cauvery Cell of the Water Resources Department is functioning at the Travancore Palace basically to follow up the Cauvery Water Dispute with the Cauvery Tribunal. Nowadays the cell is more engaged with the Mullaperiyar Dam issue. KSEB Liaison Office This office liaises with concerned Central Ministries and offices on behalf of Kerala State Electricity Board. Travancore House Art Gallery Travancore House, located at K.G Marg was the erstwhile Palace of Travancore Kingdom in the heart of the Capital city. The building has been categorized

neg: Kaveri River water dispute to Tamil Nadu from its inter-state Biligundlu dam. The judgment clarified that Karnataka will now have an enhanced share of 14.75 tmcft water per year while Tamil Nadu will get 404.25 tmcft, which will be 14.75 tmcft less than what was allotted by the tribunal in 2007. Earlier, in accordance with the 2007 award of the Cauvery Water Dispute Tribunal (CWDT), Karnataka had a share of 270 tmcft of Cauvery water. This will now increase to 284.75 tmcft. The long-awaited judgment was pronounced by a bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices Amitava Roy and A M Khanwilkar, which

neg: Kaveri River water dispute of India (GoI) to establish an Interim Supervisory Committee to implement the Cauvery tribunal order till the constitution of "Cauvery Management Board" as stated in the tribunal order. GoI issued the gazette notification on 22 May 2013 establishing the said Supervisory Committee. Interim Supervisory Committee is a stop gap arrangement when there is delay in getting its approval by the parliament per section 6A(7) of Interstate River Water Disputes Act. However, Interim Supervisory Committee established by GoI under Interstate River Water Disputes Act has full powers {including suing and to be sued by riparian states/victims for damages / compensation per

neg: Kaveri River water dispute and carried out further assessments. Subsequently, the extended deadline of the tribunal also passed and the tribunal was given yet another extension. The "Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal" announced its final verdict on 5 February 2007. According to its verdict, Tamil Nadu gets 419 TMC of Cauvery water while Karnataka gets 270 TMC. The actual release of water by Karnataka to Tamil Nadu is to be 192 TMC annually. Further, Kerala will get 30 TMC and Puducherry 7 TMC. Water to be released to Tamil Nadu according to monthly schedule as: June month (10 TMC), July (34), August (50), September (40),

neg: Kaveri River water dispute Negotiations were started in right earnest and discussions continued for almost 10 years. On 20 February 2013, based on the directions of the Supreme Court, the Indian Government notified the final award of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (CWDT) on sharing the waters of the Cauvery system among the basin States of Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, and Kerala and Union territory of Puducherry. The "extraordinary" notification in the gazette dated 19 February 2013 says the order takes effect on the date of publication. The Tribunal, in a unanimous decision in 2007, determined the total Cauvery basin water availability in a normal

neg: Interstate River Water Disputes Act 1956. Till now three tribunal awards are notified in official gazette by the Government of India. These are water dispute tribunals allocating river water use by the riparian states for Krishna (tribunal 1), Godavari and Narmada rivers. All these tribunal awards were issued before the year 2002 which cannot be altered by the new tribunals. The tribunals formed on sharing water of Ravi & Beas rivers, Cauvery / Kaveri river, Vamsadhara River, Mahadayi / Mandovi River and Krishna River (tribunal 2 ) are either yet to pronounce the verdicts or the issued verdicts are to be accepted by the Government

neg: Kaveri River water dispute state by reviewing water allocations of a tribunal. Per , the role of SC in an interstate water dispute is limited only to the interpretation and implementation of the tribunal order and to examine whether tribunal exceeded its limit by violating the constitution and the Interstate River Water Disputes Act. The Ministry of Water Resources and River Development on Friday directed that the Cauvery Water Management Authority be published in the government gazette. With this, the authority, which will play a major role in sharing of the river's waters amongst three states and a Union Territory is finally official. Headquartered

neg: Kaveri River water dispute India then constituted a tribunal in 1990 to look into the matter. After hearing arguments of all the parties involved for the next 16 years, the tribunal delivered its final verdict on 5 February 2007. In its verdict, the tribunal allocated 419 TMC of water annually to Tamil Nadu and 270 TMC to Karnataka; 30 TMC of Cauvery river water to Kerala and 7 TMC to Puducherry. Karnataka and Tamil Nadu being the major shareholders, Karnataka was ordered to release 192 TMC of water to Tamil Nadu in a normal year from June to May. The dispute however, did not

neg: Kaveri River water dispute appropriate directions to be issued to Karnataka to make good the shortfall of 48 TMC of water as per the distress sharing formula. On 15 November 2012, The "Cauvery Monitoring Committee" directed the Karnataka government to release 4.81 TMC to Tamil Nadu between 16 and 30 November. On 6 December, the supreme court directed Karnataka to release 10,000 cusecs of water to Tamil Nadu. The court asked the union government to indicate the time frame within which the final decision of the "Cauvery Water Dispute Tribunal", which was given in February 2007, was to be notified. This decision was given

neg: Kaveri River water dispute basin is nearly 3.5 million metric tons per year. The estimated salinity or total dissolved salts (TDS) for the water available in Cauvery delta is 441 ppm which is close to the safe maximum permissible 500 ppm. There is no limit imposed by the tribunal for the ground water use in the river basin. The tribunal has also permitted the basin states to use all the excess water available in above normal water years. Moreover, the river basin population has reached 40 million in the year 2015 and the increasing per capita inorganic salts used/consumed in industrial, agriculture and residential

neg: Interstate River Water Disputes Act of India. Recently, Cauvery water disputes tribunal order was notified by the GoI on 20 February 2013. The Vamsadhara tribunal pronounced its final verdict in September 2017 and permitted AP state to construct the side weir at Katragedda and Neradi barrage. In March 2018, Mahanadi Water Disputes Tribunal is formed on the direction of Supreme Court to adjudicate water sharing dispute between Odisha and Chhattisgarh states. The Mahadayi Water Tribunal pronounced its final verdict in August 2018 and permitted Karnataka state to use water outside the basin for drinking water use. Under Section 6A of this Act, central government may

neg: Kaveri River water dispute in Delhi, the Cauvery Management Authority will be the sole body to implement the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal award as modified by the SC. The Centre, as per reports, would have no say except for issuing administrative advisories to it. The Authority will be assisted in the discharge of its functions by a Regulatory Committee. A bench consisting of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice A.M. Khanwilkar and Justice D.Y. Chandrachud has further directed the government to notify them before the monsoon season sets in June. It took nearly three months after the Supreme Court order for the Centre to file

neg: Kaveri River water dispute in the view of saving the standing crops of both the states. On 22 August 2016, Tamil Nadu approached Supreme Court, seeking direction to Karnataka to release 50.052 TMC ft Cauvery water from its reservoirs for its third samba cultivation, as mandated in the final order of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal 2007. Karnataka cited distress situation as Karnataka felt there was only enough water for drinking purposes and declined to release water. On 2 September 2016, Supreme Court asked Karnataka to consider Tamil Nadu's plea on humanitarian grounds and release water and advised both states to maintain harmony. The

neg: 2018 Tamil Nadu protests for Kaveri water sharing comfortable with the SC verdict to form the Cauvery management board with in the stipulated period. The reallocation of water by the three member SC bench among the both states Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, is considered as deviation from earlier rulings given by bigger benches of SC in terms of changing the water allocations to a state by reviewing water allocations of a tribunal. Per , the role of SC in an interstate water dispute is limited only to the interpretation and implementation of the tribunal order and to examine whether tribunal exceeded its limit by violating the constitution and

neg: Kaveri River water dispute available from the year 1934 to 1971 (about 44 year old data), the tribunal estimated the average water yield in the total river basin as 767 TMC which corresponds to 47% dependability. The live storage capacity available in the river basin is nearly 310 TMC which is 40.5% of the average yield. The water used in the Cauvery delta in Tamil Nadu and Puducherry is nearly 280 TMC which is the tail end water use in the river basin and its regenerated water either goes to sea or outside the Cauvery basin. The total dissolved salt load generated in the

neg: Kaveri River water dispute by the union government within 40 days for implementing strictly the tribunal award and its verdict. Karnataka is also not happy with setting up Cauvery Management Board for monitoring water availability and use as part of the SC verdict. Union government is also not comfortable with the SC verdict to form the Cauvery management board with in the stipulated period. The reallocation of water by the three member SC bench among the both states Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, is considered as deviation from earlier rulings given by bigger benches of SC in terms of changing the water allocations to a

neg: Kaveri River water dispute final order of February 2007. There are a few differences between the Cauvery Management Board envisaged by the Tribunal and the authority proposed in the scheme. The Tribunal favored the chairperson being an irrigation engineer with not less than 20 years of experience in water resources management, whereas the scheme says the chairperson could be a senior and eminent engineer with wide experience in water resources management or an officer in the rank of Secretary or Additional Secretary to the Union government. Similarly, the representatives from the four States would be administrators rather than engineers as proposed by the Tribunal.

neg: Mettur Dam is most needed by the farmers and the general public of Tamil Nadu. This has created serious dispute and tension between the neighbouring states of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. Governments of the respective states, the Supreme Court, and the Cauvery Tribunal have so far not been successful in resolving the dispute.The tribunal has specified an annual release of 192 tmcft by Karnataka to Tamilnadu. In the years of deficit in realisation the dispute aggravates in both the states. The major reasons for the deficit are inadequate realisation of Southwest monsoon in the primary catchment areas of the river viz., Kodagu

neg: Interstate River Water Disputes Act the Parliament, under Section 6A of this Act, decides against or makes modifications to the already established implementation board/authority. In the case of Cauvery River basin, SC directed the GoI to set up a temporary Supervisory Committee to implement the tribunal order till the constitution of Cauvery Management Board by GoI. GoI established the said temporary Supervisory Committee on 22 May 2013. In the case of Babli barrage dispute, SC itself constituted the Supervisory Committee to implement the water sharing agreement between Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh in middle Godavari sub basin. Under Section 9A of this Act, central government shall

neg: Kaveri River water dispute Kaveri River water dispute The sharing of waters of the Kaveri River (also spelled as Cauvery) has been the source of a serious conflict between the two states of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. The genesis of this conflict rests in two agreements in 1892 and 1924 between the Madras Presidency and Kingdom of Mysore. The Cauvery river has 44,000 km basin area in Tamil Nadu and 32,000 km basin area in Karnataka. The inflow from Karnataka is 425 TMCft whereas that from Tamil Nadu is 252 TMCft Based on the inflow Karnataka is demanding its due share of water from

neg: Kaveri River water dispute Acting on the Supreme Court's direction, the Centre constituted a Cauvery Water Management Authority (CMA) on 1 June 2018 to address the dispute over sharing of river water among Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala and Puducherry. On February 16, 2018, the apex court had directed the government to form the CMA within six weeks in a verdict that marginally increased Karnataka's share of Cauvery water, reduced the allocation for Tamil Nadu and sought to settle the protracted water dispute between the two southern states. On June 22, 2018, Despite opposition from Karnataka, the Central government constituted the Cauvery Water Regulation Committee

neg: Lower Anaicut and Uppanai. Lower Anaicut is the terminal barrage across the Kaveri river system for sharing the river water per Cauvery Water Dispute Tribunal. 10 tmcft water is allocated for the minimum environmental flows in the dowm stream of the Lower Anaicut. Another 4 tmcft is identified as unavoidable wastage to the sea from the Lower Anaicut/river basin. If Tamil Nadu is unable to use the available Kaveri waters and water over flows downstream of Lower Anaicut in excess of 14 tmcft, the excess water gone to sea is considered as part of the utilisable water under the share of Tamil

neg: Tamil Maanila Congress as recommended by Cauvery Water Dispute Tribunal is very much crucial for all the participating southern states, especially to the state of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu to end an roe, which is lasting since pre-independence. The water sharing disputes between both states have led to several crisis including economic, law & order and farmers suicide. Therefore, the party strongly emphasis the urgent need to address the water crisis across the country. It is no more a state subject rather a subject of National Integrity. Due to constant increase in water requirement, the administrative guidelines shall at regular interval will detour;

neg: Kaveri River water dispute sticking point yet again, as in 1995–96 was how the distress would be shared between the two states. The tribunal had overlooked this crucial point when it gave the interim award and it had returned once again to haunt the situation. Tamil Nadu demanded that Karnataka honour the interim award and release to Tamil Nadu its proportionate share. Karnataka on the other hand stated that the water levels were hardly enough to meet its own demands and ruled out releasing any water in the circumstances that prevailed. A meeting of the "Cauvery River Authority" was called on 27 August 2002

neg: Kaveri River water dispute it proposes to create to monitor implementation of the Cauvery Tribunal’s final award, as modified by the Supreme Court, has been largely drawn from the Tribunal’s directions. It will be a two-tier structure, with an apex body charged with the power to ensure compliance with the final award, and a regulation committee that will monitor the field situation and water flow. The powers and functions of the authority are fairly comprehensive. Its powers would extend to apportionment, regulation and control of Cauvery waters, supervision of operations of reservoirs and regulation of water releases. The draft makes the authority’s decisions final

neg: Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal possible pollution loads for alkalinity, pH, salinity, RSC index, etc. In response to the special leave petition lodged by AP, Supreme Court directed the GoI on 15 September 2011 not to accept the KWDT – II final verdict till it is re-examined by it for any violation of Interstate River Water Disputes Act 1956(amended last in the year 2002). Cauvery water disputes tribunal order was notified by the GoI on 20 February 2013. The tribunal has assessed 740 tmcft total water availability in a normal year from the river basin. During normal years, 192 tmcft is to be released by

neg: Daulat Mal Bhandari a member of the Lok Sabha from 1952 to 1955 representing the Jaipur parliamentary constituency of Rajasthan. Bhandari was a senior advocate on the rolls of the Bar Council of India. He was appointed a judge of the Rajasthan High Court in 1955 and he rose to become the Chief Justice there in 1968. He also served as Chairman of the Revenue Law Commission constituted by the Government of Rajasthan and as a member of the Krishna Godavari Water Dispute Tribunal constituted by the Government of India. He was a founder member of the Indian Law Institute in New Delhi.

neg: Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal of New South Wales and slow. The current tribunal is the latest attempt to improve consumer dispute resolution in New South Wales. The tribunal consists of a Chairperson and Deputy Chairpersons. Senior Members and Members are also appointed to the tribunal. Senior members hear more complex cases. The tribunal may also use assessors to determine particular issues. Assessors are generally experts in the field that there is a dispute in. The Tribunal has eight Divisions, i.e. General, Motor Vehicles, Tenancy, Home Building, Commercial, Strata and Community Schemes, Residential Parks, and Retirement Villages. Some of the Divisions limit the amount of money that may be

neg: Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal of New South Wales NSW government and its agencies on a range of economic and policy issues such as pricing, efficiency, industry structure and competition. The Tribunal comprises three permanent members: a Part-Time Chairman and 2 Part-Time Tribunal Members. Tribunal members are appointed by the Premier. The Premier can also appoint any number of additional temporary members. As of April 2017, the permanent Tribunal members are: Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal of New South Wales The Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal of New South Wales (IPART) is an independent regulatory and pricing tribunal that oversees regulation in water, gas, electricity and transport industries in

neg: Arbitral tribunal The parties to a dispute are usually free to determine the number and composition of the arbitral tribunal. In some legal systems, an arbitration clause which provides for two arbitrators (or any other even number) is understood to imply that the appointed arbitrators will select an additional arbitrator as a chairman of the tribunal, to avoid deadlock arising. Different legal systems differ as to how many arbitrators should constitute the tribunal if there is no agreement. Arbitral tribunals are usually constituted (appointed) in two types of proceedings: Permanent tribunals tend to have their own rules and procedures, and tend to

neg: 1991 Anti-Tamil violence of Karnataka 1991 Anti-Tamil violence of Karnataka The 1991 Anti-Tamil violence of Karnataka refers to incidents of mob violence targeting Tamils in the Karnataka state of India. The incidents took place in Southern Karnataka on 12–13 December 1991, mainly in the cities of Bangalore and Mysore. The attacks originated in the demonstrations organised against the orders of the Cauvery Water Tribunal appointed by the Government of India. The violence terrified the Tamil populace of Southern Karnataka forcing hundreds of thousands to flee in a matter of weeks. The official statistics given by the Government of Karnataka was that eighteen people had been

neg: Kaveri River water dispute the draft scheme in court. The NDA government had come under immense criticism for delaying the finalisation of the scheme because of the Karnataka election. The Government's counsel had even said in court that the cabinet was yet to approve of the scheme as Prime Minister Narendra Modi and other ministers were campaigning in Karnataka where election took place on May 12. The Supreme Court on 16 February 2018 delivered its verdict in the decades-old Cauvery water dispute, allocating more water to the state of Karnataka. The top court ordered the Karnataka government to release 177.25 tmcft of Cauvery water

neg: Kaveri River water dispute Committee". The "Cauvery River Authority" would consist of the Prime Minister and the Chief Ministers of all four states (Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Puducherry and Kerala) and was headquartered in New Delhi. The "Cauvery Monitoring Committee" on the other hand, was an expert body which consisted of engineers, technocrats and other officers who would take stock of the 'ground realities' and report to the government. In the summer of 2002, things once again came to a head as the monsoon failed in both Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. Reservoirs in both states fell to record low levels and inevitably tempers rose. The

neg: Kaveri River water dispute to Tamil Nadu's petition asked the "Cauvery River Authority" for details of the water release and water levels in the reservoirs. The flare up had by now, well and truly taken an ugly turn and there were accusations and counter accusations being thrown all around in both states. The dispute had already spilled onto the streets in the Mandya district of Karnataka and was threatening to spread to other parts of the state too. Precipitating the matters on the streets, the Supreme Court ordered Karnataka on 3 October to comply with the "Cauvery River Authority" and resume the release of

neg: Kaveri River water dispute had its own plans to build a storage dam at Mettur with a capacity of 80 TMC. After a reference to the Government of India, permission was accorded to Mysore, but for a reduced storage of 11TMC. During construction, however, the foundation was laid to suit the earlier desired full storage. This raised Madras' hackles and the dispute continued. As a result, the then British Government of India referred the matter to arbitration under Rule IV of the 1892 Agreement. The Cauvery dispute thus had come up for arbitration for the first time. Sir H D Griffin was appointed arbitrator

neg: Kaveri River water dispute the Cauvery Supervisory Committee, set up by Supreme Court, ordered Karnataka to release 3,000 cusecs per day from 21 September 2016 to 30 September 2016. On 20 September 2016, Supreme Court directed Karnataka to further release 6,000 cusecs of water from 21 September 2016 to 27 September 2016 and directed the Central Government to set up the Cauvery Management Board in order to provide a permanent solution for the dispute. However, in a special session of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly held on 23 September, a resolution was passed not to release water to Tamil Nadu, hence defying the Supreme Court's

neg: Kaveri River water dispute just a couple of months before the September 2006 deadline, the tribunal recommended the formation of another expert committee to study the 'ground realities' yet again. This was unanimously and vehemently opposed by all the four states party to the dispute. The states contended that this move would further delay a judgement which has already been 16 years in the making. More than the disapproval of all the four states of the new expert committee that was proposed, the proposal turned out to be a major embarrassment for the tribunal. This was because, not only were the four states opposed

neg: Kaveri River water dispute Karnataka government filed a review petition before the Supreme Court seeking a stay on its 28 September order directing it to release 9,000 cusecs of Cauvery water everyday to Tamil Nadu, until 15 October. On 6 October 2012, several Kannada organisations, under the banner of "Kannada Okkoota", called a Karnataka bandh (close down) on 6 October in protest against the Cauvery water release. On 8 October, the Supreme Court of India announced the release of 9,000 cusecs had to be continued and it was up to the "Cauvery River Authority"'s head, the Prime Minister, as a responsible person, to ensure

neg: Kaveri River water dispute but the Tamil Nadu chief minister Jayalalitha walked out of the meeting. The focus now shifted to the Supreme Court which ordered Karnataka to release 1.25 TMC of water every day unless the "Cauvery River Authority" revised it. Karnataka was forced to release water but pressed for another meeting of the "Cauvery River Authority" which was fixed for 8 September. The Tamil Nadu Chief Minister this time boycotted the meet citing insufficient notice as the reason. A minister from her cabinet, however represented Tamil Nadu. The "Cauvery River Authority" revised the Court's order from 1.25 TMC to 0.8 TMC per

neg: 2018 Tamil Nadu protests for Kaveri water sharing recover the Cauvery water sharing rights from Karnataka. On 11 April, the PMK followed and proceeded a rail strike and harthal from morning to evening. The home matches of the Chennai Super Kings in the 2018 IPL season are under threat following the Cauvery river dispute and about 4000 security personnel were deployed in wake of the homecoming match for CSK against the Kolkata Knight Riders on April 10, 2018 at the M. A. Chidambaram Stadium. Amidst the IPL boycott threat over the Cauvery water controversy, the fans came in huge crowd to welcome and support the Chennai Super Kings

neg: Goolam Hoosen Kader Meeran acting Regional Chairman in 1997, and a Regional Chairman in 1998. He was appointed a Judge on the South Eastern Circuit in 2002. He was President of the Employment Tribunals for England and Wales from 2002 to 2008. He retired as president of the Employment Tribunals for England and Wales in 2008, and as a circuit judge in 2009. His Honour Judge Goolam Meeran was appointed a Knight Bachelor 'For services to the Administration of Justice' in the New Year's Honours List in January 2009. Meeran was elected as a half-time judge of the United Nations Dispute Tribunal to begin

neg: United Nations Dispute Tribunal has to decide from the S.G. on down whether this is an organization that respects the rule of law or not”. The UN Dispute Tribunal operates on a full-time basis.The UNDT is composed of "three full-time Judges, two half-time Judges and three ad litem judges". The Judges are appointed by the General Assembly. The current composition of the Tribunal is as follows: Ad litem judges United Nations Dispute Tribunal The United Nations Dispute Tribunal (UNDT) is the court of first instance in the internal justice system of the United Nations. It became operational on 1 July 2009. The UNDT "hears

neg: Kaveri River water dispute of dams in the event of the Interim Order not being honoured. Karnataka, which had always maintained that the interim order had no scientific basis and was intrinsically flawed, strongly protested the proposal to set up such an authority. The Government then made several modifications to the powers of the Authority and came up with a new proposal. The new proposal greatly reduced the executive powers of the Authority. The power to take over control of dams was also done away with. Under this new proposal, the Government set up two new bodies, viz., "Cauvery River Authority" and "Cauvery Monitoring

neg: Beijing Arbitration Commission Arbitral Tribunal has an equal vote. If no majority opinion is reached, the final decision will be made by the presiding arbitrator. A Summary Procedure case (a case involving a disputed amount of one million Yuan or less) occurs before an Arbitral Tribunal composed of a sole arbitrator. The arbitrator is jointly appointed by the parties. If the parties cannot agree on an arbitrator, the Chairman makes the selection. In cases where the amount in dispute is one million Yuan or less, the parties may jointly select to follow the Common Procedure and the added financial cost it entails. The

neg: Stephen M. Schwebel between states and foreign investors. In October 2010, Schwebel was appointed by the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon as the Chairman of the Kishanganga/Neelum River Hydro-Electric Project (Pakistan v. India) Arbitration. He also acted as counsel and advocate for Colombia in its territorial and maritime delimitation dispute with Nicaragua and for Belize in its territorial, insular and maritime boundary dispute with Guatemala. In October 2007, Judge Schwebel was appointed to a three-member tribunal tasked with determining whether or not to annul the award (on jurisdiction) rendered in the dispute between the UK registered firm Malaysian Historical Salvors and the Government of

neg: Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal in the Gazette. Therefore, for the time being, Andhra Pradesh has been given liberty [clause V(C) of KWDT −1] to make use of any surplus waters though it cannot claim any rights over the same. The KWDT-1 provided for a review of its award after 31 May 2000. However no such review was taken up for more than 3 years after that. In April 2004, the second KWDT, was constituted by the Government of India following requests by all three states. This tribunal has started its proceedings from 16.07.07. The second Krishna Water Dispute Tribunal gave its draft verdict on

neg: Hogenakkal Falls water dispute ease the crisis the Union Water Resource Ministry of Government of India convened a meeting between the representatives of the states in which Governments of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu agreed on two projects, one in Mekedatu in Karnataka and other in Hogenakkal in Tamil Nadu. According to the project, at a particular spot in the waterfall water from the Cauvery is to be drawn and distributed to people of Tamil Nadu. Karnataka agreed to abide by the conditions imposed by the Union Water Resources Ministry if Tamil Nadu withdrew its objections to Cauvery water being used to augment supply to

neg: Kaveri River water dispute date of hearing. On 1 October 2016, Karnataka filed for review petition over Supreme Court's latest order to release 6,000 cusecs of Cauvery water from 1 to 6 October and also held a special session of the state legislature. After another special legislature session on 3 October, the Karnataka government decided to release water for agricultural purposes, but it was not specified whether water would be released to farmers of Karnataka or Tamil Nadu. The Supreme Court on Tuesday, 4 October directed Karnataka to release 2,000 cusecs of Cauvery water per day to Tamil Nadu from 7 to 18 October.

neg: Arie Reich (2008-2012) and currently the Dean of Students (2018- ). He also holds the Jean Monnet Chair for European Union Legal Studies. Reich has also held many public position including: Chairman of the Trade Levies Commission, Israel's Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duty Tribunal (1996-2002), Member of the Advisory Council of Israel's Industrial Cooperation Authority (ICA). Appointed by the Minister of Industry, Trade and Employment. (2009–present), Member of the World Trade Organization dispute settlement panel on European Union - Definite Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Iron or Steel Fasteners from China (2010), Member of the World Trade Organization dispute settlement panel on United States

neg: Mandovi River bands - add to the charm of the river. The sharing of the waters of this river is a cause of dispute between the governments of Karnataka and Goa. The Karnataka government proposes to divert some water from the Mahadayi river to the Malaprabha River basin as part of the Kalasa-Banduri Nala project, as approximately 188 tmcft of water at 75% dependability is available in the river. Mahadayi Water Tribunal under Interstate River Water Disputes Act has been constituted to decide the sharing of the river waters by the riparian states. In August 2018, Mahadayi Water Tribunal verdict permitted Goa

neg: Hogenakkal Falls water dispute picturesque waterfall belongs to it (based on erstwhile topographical map of Madras Presidency), thereby alleging that the drinking water project at Hogenakkal is illegal. The Hogenakkal project was approved in 1998 by Union government of India. The project just like the Bangalore project an extra demand on the neighbouring state for Cauvery water since each state would use its share. The Hindu – Karnataka gave consent in 1998 to Hogenakkal project: Tamil Nadu Hogenakkal Falls water dispute The Hogenakkal Water Dispute is a conflict between the Indian states of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka over the implementation of Hogenakkal Integrated Drinking

neg: Kaveri River water dispute day. This time however, the Karnataka government in open defiance of the order of the "Cauvery River Authority", refused to release any water succumbing to the large scale protests that had mounted in the Cauvery districts of the state. Tamil Nadu aghast at the defiance, went back to the Supreme Court. Karnataka now resumed the release of water for a few days, but stopped it again on 18 September as a Karnataka farmers and their protests threatened to take a dangerous turn. The centre now stepped in and asked Karnataka to release the water. The Supreme Court meanwhile, in response

neg: Kaveri River water dispute order. On 27 September, the Supreme Court ordered Karnataka to give 6000 cusecs of water to Tamil Nadu for 3 days which was again not carried out. On 30 September, the Supreme Court gave Karnataka a "last chance" and ordered 6,000 cusecs of water to be released during the first 6 days of October. The Court asked the Central Government to set up the Cauvery Water Management Board by 4 October so that the Board can visit the Cauvery sites to check the ground realities. The apex court called for a report on 6 October, which would be the next

neg: Kaveri River water dispute sectors are enhancing the salt export requirements. When adequate salt export from the river basin is not taking place to the sea by forcing Cauvery delta to face water shortage, the water quality (salinity, pH, alkalinity, sodicity, etc.) available for Cauvery delta would deteriorate beyond the permissible limits impeding its sustainable productivity and its aquatic ecosystem conservation. Ultimately salt export criteria is the limitation for the water resources development in a river basin. In response to the Special Leave Petition (SLP) lodged by Tamil Nadu earlier, the Supreme Court on 10 May 2013 issued an interim direction to the Government

neg: Kaveri (16 feb 2018) Karnataka will get 400.4 tmc ft,Tamil Nadu 200.25 tmc ft,Kerala 30 tmc ft and Puducherry 7 tmc ft, and 14 tmc ft will be reserved for environmental protection. Acting on the Supreme Court's direction, the Centre constituted a Cauvery Water Management Authority (CMA) on 1st June 2018 to address the dispute over sharing of river water among Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala and Puducherry. On February 16 2018, the apex court had directed the government to form the CMA within six weeks in a verdict that marginally increased Karnataka's share of Cauvery water, reduced the allocation for Tamil

neg: Kattuputhur one of the famous place for agricultural products and for business related works. Paddy and Banana are grown alternatively through the year. The agriculture depends on the cauvery water mainly flowing in 3 km distance from Kattuputhur. The cauvery water is made available to the fertile lands of kattuputhur and surrounding villages through canal branching out from the main cauvery river.There are many small canals which provides water to the fields and there were mostly agriculture dependent people.A new dam was built between cauvery river for irrigational uses.It is the largest dam in Tamil Nadu as dated.The dam also has

neg: Justice Kishan Swaroop Chaudhari was appointed as Chairman of Special Investigation Team to investigate Illegal Mining in the State of Rajasthan. He submitted a detailed report before the Rajasthan High Court in May 2012. Chaudhari has been appointed as Member of National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi for a period of 5 years. He is the first Judge from the State of Rajasthan who has been appointed as Member of National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission. Justice Kishan Swaroop Chaudhari Kishan Swaroop Chaudhari was a former Justice of Rajasthan High Court of India, serving the court between 2008 and 2010. Coming from a family

neg: Jean Dalton practise, covering medical negligence, commercial and corporate law. Dalton was appointed a Senior Counsel in 2004. Dalton also served as President of the Anti-Discrimination Tribunal, Deputy Chair of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Tribunal, and as a member of the Land Court. Dalton was appointed to the Supreme Court on 25 February 2011, the 108th judge to be appointed. Dalton has been the trial judge in a diverse range of cases, from refusing bail for a man accused of domestic violence while awaiting trial for other allegations of domestic violence, to a commercial dispute where the administrator was

neg: Michael Jones, Lord Jones law firm Simpson & Marwick and head of its Dispute Resolution Department and its Advocacy Unit. In 1997, Jones was appointed part-time Chairman of the Police Appeals Tribunal and became an Ordinary Judge of Appeal in Jersey and in Guernsey in 2005. On 1 June 2012, it was announced he had been appointed a Senator of the College of Justice, and he took up the post on 11 July 2012. Jones was the Honorary President of the mooting society at the University of Dundee School of Law. Jones died suddenly in Edinburgh on 13 March 2016, aged 68. Michael Jones,

neg: Marine Appeal Tribunal into existence when a dispute arises. Marine Appeal Tribunal The Marine Appeal Tribunal of New South Wales, is a former tribunal in New South Wales, a state of Australia, which dealt with appeals from decisions of the NSW Minister for Ports under certain decisions under the "Marine Safety Act 1998" (NSW). The tribunal is now constituted under the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal. The tribunal was constituted under the "Marine Safety Act 1998" (NSW). It sat as a three-member panel. The former chairperson of the tribunal was a magistrate of the Local Court of New South Wales appointed

neg: Kaveri River water dispute this happened. The Prime Minister ruled out a review of the "Cauvery River Authority"’s decision until 20 October, rejecting the plea by both the Congress and Bharatiya Janata Party leaders from Karnataka. Within a few hours, Karnataka stopped release of Cauvery water to Tamil Nadu. On 9 October 2012, Tamil Nadu's chief minister directed authorities to immediately file a contempt petition against the Karnataka government for flouting the verdict of the Supreme Court by unilaterally stopping the release of water to Tamil Nadu. Tamil Nadu made a fresh plea in the Supreme Court on 17 October, reiterating its demand for

neg: Kaveri River water dispute of protest. On 21 September, Karnataka filed a petition before the "Cauvery River Authority" seeking review of its 19 September ruling. On 24 September, Tamil Nadu's Chief minister directed the officials to immediately file a petition in the Supreme Court seeking a direction to Karnataka to release Tamil Nadu its due share of water. On 28 Sep 2012, the Supreme Court slammed the Karnataka government for failing to comply with the directive of the "Cauvery River Authority". Left with no other option, Karnataka started releasing water. This led to wide protests and violence in Karnataka. On 4 October 2012, the

neg: United Nations Dispute Tribunal of officials of the Organization, but by judges appointed by the Member States of the United Nations through the General Assembly, from which UNDT derives its mandate." As a first step in the formal system, a staff member who wishes to contest an administrative decision will have to request a management evaluation. When no resolution through informal means can be arrived at, and when the result of the management evaluation is not to the satisfaction of the staff member, the staff member can file an application to the United Nations Dispute Tribunal. The UN Dispute Tribunal examines the facts of

neg: Kaveri River water dispute Singh to constitute a tribunal and refer all disputes to it. A three-man tribunal was thus constituted on 2 June 1990. The tribunal was headquartered at New Delhi and was to be headed by Justice Chittatosh Mookerjee. The four states presented their demands to the tribunal as under Soon after the tribunal was set up, Tamil Nadu demanded a mandatory injunction on Karnataka for the immediate release of water and other reliefs. This was dismissed by the tribunal. Tamil Nadu now went back to the Supreme Court which directed the tribunal to reconsider Tamil Nadu’s plea. The tribunal reconsidered Tamil

neg: Kaveri River water dispute and binding. However, there is an ambiguous clause: if the authority finds that any one of the States is not cooperative, it can seek the Centre’s help, and the Centre’s decision will be final and binding. This can be seen either as an enabling clause to resolve the situation when there is a stand-off, or as one that gives scope to the Centre to intervene on behalf of one State. The draft Cauvery Water Management Scheme, as prepared by the Union government and submitted to the Supreme Court in May 2018, is essentially based on the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal’s

neg: 2018 Tamil Nadu protests for Kaveri water sharing within a month. On 16 February 2018, the Supreme Court has pronounced its verdict. The Supreme Court urged to reduce 14 tmc water allocation to Tamil Nadu and requested Karnataka to release only 177 tmc of water to Tamil Nadu for next 15 years. The verdict also mandated to formally constitute the Kavery river management board by the union government within 40 days for implementing strictly the tribunal award and its verdict. Karnataka shown its unhappiness in setting up Cauvery Management Board for monitoring water availability and use as part of the Supreme Court verdict. Union government is also not

neg: Kaveri River water dispute section 6A(3)} similar to an authority/ board established by parliament till parliament has not annulled the same. While discussions continued, a "Cauvery Fact Finding Committee (CFFC)" was constituted. The brief of the CFFC was to inspect the ground realities and come up with a report. The CFFC came up with a preliminary report in 1972 and a final report in 1973. Inter state discussions were held based on this report. Finally in 1974, a draft agreement which also provided for the creation of a "Cauvery Valley Authority" was prepared by the Ministry of Irrigation. This draft however, was not ratified.

neg: Anil B. Divan the committee on Water Resources Law of the International Law Association. He has been appointed by the government to help resolve Cauvery Water Disputes. In the late 1980s, Divan was one of the founders of the Centre for Public Interest Litigation, a Non-governmental organization that conducts litigation on matters of public interest. The first president was Justice V. M. Tarkunde, who was also the founder of the People's Union for Civil Liberties. Other founder members were senior advocates including Fali Sam Nariman, Shanti Bhushan, Rajinder Sachar and Colin Gonsalves. In February 2005, Prashant Bhushan and Anil B. Divan were counsel

neg: Chennai Super Kings–Royal Challengers Bangalore rivalry Kings renewed their rivalry with RCB after facing their arch-rivals Royal Challengers Bangalore in a group league match during the 2018 Indian Premier League season at the M. Chinnaswamy Stadium. Chennai Super Kings registered their fifth victory of the tournament by defeating the rivals by 5 wickets. The match was considered as a high pressurised match (known as Cauvery Derby) for both of the teams representing the relevant states following the 2018 Cauvery water dispute between Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. Chennai Super Kings–Royal Challengers Bangalore rivalry The Cauvery Derby, also called the South Indian Derby, Namma Derby is a sports

neg: Interstate River Water Disputes Act year 2002 (i.e. but not the tribunal awards issued after the year 2002). Thus this amendment bars the tribunals to give any time period/validity for constituting a new tribunal. This is to keep provision to resolve fresh water disputes which were not addressed by earlier tribunals/ agreements as and when they surface. A permanent water dispute tribunal with its members from sitting judges of Supreme Court or High courts, is proposed to resolve the growing number of interstate river water disputes expeditiously. Union government is contemplating to bring a new act in place of River Boards Act, 1956 which is

neg: Narmada Valley Development Authority measures. Narmada being one of the major rivers in Central India, there has been large amount of studies aiming at exploiting the abundant water resource. This has also led to various disputes between Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Gujarat, the three states through which a major portion of Narmada flows. One such dispute was regarding the construction of Navagam dam in Gujarat, which would submerge areas in Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra. To resolve the dispute between the states in sharing the Narmada water, the Narmada Water Disputes Tribunal was formed by the Government of India in 1969. In 1979, 10 years

neg: United Nations Dispute Tribunal the case, and conducts, where necessary, oral proceedings. These proceedings are normally held in public. Cases before the Dispute Tribunal are usually considered by a single judge, but in cases that are particularly complex or important a three-judge panel may be convened.The judgments of the Dispute Tribunal are binding. The full text of the Statute of the UN Dispute Tribunal is contained in the annex to General Assembly resolution A/RES/63/253. UN Dispute Tribunal has registries in New York City, Geneva and Nairobi. The geographical coverage of these is as follows: Parties to the proceedings, i.e., the Applicant and the Respondent,

neg: Paul Omu South-Eastern State. In 1984, the Muhammadu Buhari regime created military tribunals to try public officers from the Shehu Shagari era who had been accused of embezzling public funds. Omu was appointed chairman of the Lagos Zone tribunal. The tribunal found most of the politicians guilty, handing out jail sentences of various terms. In September 1985 Omu was Commandant, Command and Staff College and a member of the Armed Forces Ruling Council. When General Ibrahim Babangida decided to plan for the transfer to civilian rule, he appointed Omu chairman of a nine-man panel to review recommendations of the Political Bureau and

neg: P. Chandrasekhara Rao Rao was appointed Legal Adviser to the Permanent Mission of India at the United Nations (New York City) from 1972–1976. He continued to hold high level posts in the Indian government's Ministry of Justice, including Deputy Legislative Counsel, Additional Legal Adviser, Joint Secretary and Legal Adviser, Additional Secretary (1976–1988), Secretary (1988–1996), Union Ministry of Law and Sole Arbitrator in Government contracts (1979–1983). He was the Secretary-General of the International Center for Alternative Dispute Resolution, New Delhi (1995–1996). Since 1 October 1996, Rao has been a judge at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. Rao has also been

neg: Scottish Land Court before application.) The Chairman is supported by a Deputy Chairman, who holds the office of advocate. , the Chairman of the Scottish Land Court is Lord Minginish who was appointed by the Monarch on 1 October 2014, having previously served as Deputy Chairman. His nomination by First Minister Alex Salmond was made following a recommendation of the Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland. At the same time he was also appointed by the Scottish Ministers as President of the Lands Tribunal for Scotland. Previous chairmen of the Land Court have been: The Agricultural Members (also called "practical Members") are lay (not

neg: Stephen Lee (snooker player) the "finding of the tribunal, the sanction and the costs awarded". Sport Resolutions appointed Edwin Glasgow QC to chair the appeal, with the Appeals Committee determining that the appeal should be heard in two parts. Originally set for 30 January 2014, the appeal was adjourned to 17 February. In the first stage of his appeal Lee challenged the independence of Adam Lewis, chairman of the original tribunal. Lewis had previously represented Leyton Orient F.C.—owned by World Snooker's CEO, Barry Hearn—in a legal dispute and Lee's legal team argued there was a conflict of interest. The argument was rejected on the

neg: Kaveri River water dispute of the major tributaries of the Cauvery since the Kabini River, now originated in Kerala. The Karaikal region of Puducherry at the tail end of the river demanded the waters that it claimed to have always been using for drinking and some minimal agriculture. While these additional claims complicated matters greatly at a technical level, Mysore state and Tamil Nadu still remained the major parties to the dispute. By the late 1960s, both states and the Central government began to realize the gravity of the situation as the 50-year run of the 1924 agreement was soon coming to an end.

neg: Kaveri River water dispute The apex court had ordered the state to release 6,000 cusecs of Cauvery water per day. The hearing of the case is adjourned to 18 October. Supreme Court (SC) on 9 January 2018 declared that it would pronounce its verdict clearing all the pending cases and the confusion within a month. On 16 February 2018, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has pronounced its verdict. Reduced 14.75 tmc water allocation to Tamil Nadu and now Karnataka to release only 177 tmc of water to Tamil Nadu for next 15 years. The verdict also mandated to formally constitute the Kavery river management board

neg: Mettur Dam was designed by Sir M Vishveswariah in 1911 and completed in 1917 near Mysore. The Mettur Dam has received public attention since the latter half of the 20th century, and especially in the mid-1990s, due to the Kaveri River water dispute between the States of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. Because of subsequent dams constructed across the Cauvery and its tributaries in Karnataka, namely Harangi Dam, Hemavathi Dam, Kabini Dam, following the KRS Dam; Mettur Dam does not receive much water during lean seasons. As a result, the dam nearly goes dry during certain periods of the year, often when water

neg: Ambareesh polling 431,439 votes against 250,916 for the INC candidate. In 1999, Ambareesh rejoined the INC and contested in five elections since. He served as minister of state for Information and Broadcasting in the 14th Lok Sabha, but resigned over his dissatisfaction with the Cauvery Dispute Tribunal award, though the resignation was not formally accepted. He was defeated in the May 2009 General Elections.He helped in elections for H.D.Kumaraswamy (in kanakapura parliament election in 90s),S.M. Krishna(99) and K.R pete Krishna. During the course of his public life, he held the following positions: Ambareesh developed a friendship with actress Sumalatha after they

neg: Kaveri River water dispute serious practical challenges in the future water sharing and disputes may still arise before it. The verdict of the Supreme Court on the Cauvery river waters sharing dispute can open a Pandora's box of challenges. The verdict can have spillover effects on the various inter and Intrastate river disputes. Vital observations from the Judgment: The judgment reiterated the supremacy of the Supreme Court and its powers of judicial review. With increasing number of river water disputes between the states, the applications before the Supreme Court may Increase. The judgment will also impact various ongoing disputes like Mahadayi. The important implications

neg: Adama Lamikanra in various Magisterial District namely; Port Harcourt, Elimgbu, Isiokpo Emohua and as Chief Magistrate Administration. In 1998, she was appointed a Judge of the High Court of Rivers State. On the 15th of January, 2016 she was sworn in as Acting Chief Judge of Rivers State. Other positions of responsibility held by his Lordship are: Chairman, Elections Petition Tribunal, Nchia and Port Harcourt in 1991; and is currently the Chairman, Rivers State Judicial Commission. She attended several Conferences and Seminars some of which are; The Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Conference , Conference on Multi-Door Court House, The 2009 All Nigeria

neg: Mahesh Mittal Kumar Kumar conducted a number of commercial arbitrations which included the cases referred by Hon'ble the Supreme Court and the High Courts. Justice Kumar then took over charge as Chairman, Company Law Board on 5 th June 2015 and continued as such till 31 st May 2016. He has now been appointed as the first President of National Company Law Tribunal on the abolition of Company Law Board on 1 st June 2016. Mahesh Mittal Kumar Mahesh Mittal Kumar is chairman of National Company Law Tribunal, since the body came into force . He served as 31st Chief Justice of Jammu

neg: Kuruvai Kuruvai Kuruvai, also known as "short-term" in Tamil, are the crops grown in cauvery Delta of Tamil Nadu state in India. The crops that are grown in this delta are mostly paddy and the health of these crops and the eventual livelihood of these farmers are extremely dependent on abundant flow of water on the Cauvery river. The river has been the center of controversy between Tamil Nadu State and Karnataka State of India. The river which originates in Karnataka has been the life line of farmers of karnataka and Tamil Nadu. Karnataka'S capital city Bangalore gets its drinking water

neg: V. Balakrishna Eradi the High Court of Kerala in January 1980 and was elevated to the Judge of the Supreme Court of India a year later. While functioning as Judge of the Supreme Court, was appointed by Government of India as Chairman of the Ravi and Beas Waters Tribunal for adjudication of the dispute regarding sharing of the Punjab River waters between States of Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan. Justice Eradi retired from the Bench of the Supreme Court on attaining the age of superannuation in 1987. In 1988, he was appointed as President of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, a post he

neg: Archie Elliott, Lord Elliott Scotland, and was appointed Queen's Counsel in 1963. In 1971, he was appointed a Chairman of the Medical Appeal Tribunals, and as President of the newly established Lands Tribunal for Scotland. In 1978, he was appointed Chairman of the Scottish Land Court, retaining his position as President of the Lands Tribunal. Since his retirement in 1992, the positions have always been held together. He was succeeded by Alexander Philip, Lord Philip. Elliott married Susan Isobel Mackenzie Ross in 1954, with whom he had two sons, Peter and Michael Elliott. He died on 9 August 2008. Archie Elliott, Lord Elliott (Walter)

neg: Goolam Hoosen Kader Meeran Goolam Hoosen Kader Meeran Goolam Hoosen Kader Meeran (born 12 April 1943) is a judge of the United Nations Dispute Tribunal. Goolam Meeran grew up in South Africa during the apartheid regime. He graduated from the University of Manchester in 1969 and graduated with a MSc (Econ) in Social Psychology from the London School of Economics in 1970. He was awarded a diploma in law in 1981. He was called to the Bar (Gray's Inn) in 1982. Meeran was appointed a JP in 1985. He became a part-time Chairman of Employment Tribunals in 1992, a full-time Chairman in 1993, an

neg: Mental Health Review Tribunal (England and Wales) members are appointed by the Ministry of Justice. There is a Liaison Judge appointed to the Tribunal to lead its development. The second body is the Mental Health Review Tribunal Secretariat. This is staffed by members of the Department of Health, and has responsibility for the administration of the Tribunals. There is a Regional Chairman appointed for each of the two Tribunal regions (the North Region and the South Region), based in London and Manchester. Regional Chairmen's responsibilities include appointing members to particular hearings, ensuring that all the statutory requirements are complied with, making judicial decisions and giving such directions

neg: Segun Jegede as the commander of the reconnaissance battalion; and Yusuf Munyakazi, leader of the interahamwe militia in Cyangugu province. For a major part of Jegede’s 13-year stint at the UNICTR, he was "pro bono" Chairman of the Staff Rebuttal Panel responsible for the resolution of staff disputes with the management of the Tribunal. In 2009, the United Nations General Assembly reformed its internal judicial system and established a new court known as the United Nations Dispute Tribunal. Jegede is a pro bono Counsel before the reformed tribunal. In Gakumba v Secretary General United Nations, Jegede successfully argued Mr Gakumba’s case and

neg: Arthur Leong (judge) a particularly significant contribution to the development of the bilingual capacity of our courts. In relation to the use of Chinese, his work has been of pivotal importance." Leong remained active in retirement. In 2003 he was appointed chairman of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. He later served as Chief Adjudicator of the Immigration Tribunal and as Chairman of the Post-Release Supervision Board. In 2003, Justice Leong was awarded the Gold Bauhinia Star, one of the highest honours given by the HKSAR Government. Leong died in August 2010. Arthur Leong (judge) Arthur Leong GBS (1936–2010) was a judge in Hong Kong.

neg: Kaveri River water dispute In 1947, India attain independence from the British. Further in 1956, the reorganization of the states of India took place and state boundaries were redrawn based on linguistic demographics. Kodagu or Coorg (the birthplace of the Cauvery), became a part of Mysore state. Parts of Malabar which earlier formed part of Madras Presidency went to Kerala. Puducherry had already become a de facto Union territory in 1954. Redrawing of state boundaries caused parts of Kerala and Puducherry to be in the Cauvery River basin and therefore become stakeholders in the sharing of its waters. Kerala staked its claim as one

neg: Central Secretariat Service in various institutions starting at Level E onwards. Recently, some CSS officers have been in the list of corrupt bureaucrats and have come under the CBI scanner for alleged involvement in a few corruption cases. Since its inception, CSS has produced few outstanding civil servants in India. Influential members include - M.P. Singh who was appointed as Vice-Chairman of Central Administrative Tribunal at Jabalpur Bench, P.G. Lele who served as Additional Secretary to Government of India in the Ministry of Finance and M.V. Ayyar who was empanelled as Secretary to Government of India. Reportedly, in the 1960s, there have been

neg: James McGhie, Lord McGhie From 1987 to 1992, he was part-time Chairman of the Medical Appeal Tribunal, and from 1992 to 1996 was a Member of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board. In 1996, he was appointed Chairman of the Scottish Land Court and President of the Lands Tribunal for Scotland, with the judicial title, Lord McGhie. James McGhie, Lord McGhie James Marshall McGhie, Lord McGhie is a Scottish lawyer who until 2014 was the Chairman of the Scottish Land Court and President of the Lands Tribunal for Scotland, and a Senator of the College of Justice. McGhie was educated at Perth Academy, and studied

neg: Derek Schofield Judicial Review. A large costs order was made against him consequently by the very Court over which he presided over until his suspension. He has paid these costs. The Tribunal report is critical of Chief Justice Schofield for having taken this Judicial Review. He purported to have cancelled the Ceremonial Opening of the Legal Year (for which he is also criticised by the Tribunal report) without success as it was held by the newly appointed Head of the Judiciary. The dispute escalated further to involve leading members of the Gibraltar legal profession who intended proposing a vote of no confidence

neg: M. B. Patil the demise of his father. He has been elected as a member of legislative assembly four times and once as a member of parliament. He is a member of AICC, KPCC and a member of coordination and executive committees of KPCC. In 2013, when Congress Party formed the government in Karnataka, M. B. Patil was sworn in as the Irrigation Minister. When beneficiary states filed an appeal in the higher court questioning Krishna Water Dispute Tribunal verdict, the irrigation ministry helmed by M. B. Patil, took necessary technical and legal measures required for presenting an effective argument before the tribunal

neg: Kan Singh Parihar justice for 11 years until his retirement in August 1975. After his retirement, Parihar was offered the Chairmanship of National Tribunal at Jabalpur. He was also offered Chairmanship of Monopolies Trade Commission at New Delhi by the Prime Minister of India Indira Gandhi. In 1977 he was appointed Chairman of Emergency Excesses Inquiry Commission (The Kan Singh Commission) by the Rajasthan Government and again in 1979 he was appointed Vice Chancellor of University of Jodhpur (now Jai Narain Vyas University). After retirement, Parihar worked with various social, educational and religious institutions in Jodhpur. Parihar has been patron and president of