In Brief
The Supreme Court held that appeals assailing the final order of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal are maintainable under Article 136 of the Constitution. Although Article 262(2) read with Section 11 of the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956 bars the Court's jurisdiction over original water disputes, this bar applies only to disputes at the pre-adjudicatory stage. Once a water dispute is adjudicated by the tribunal, it ceases to be a 'dispute' within Article 262. The Court further held that Section 6(2)—providing that the tribunal's decision has the force of a Supreme Court decree—is merely a legal fiction for enforcement and does not exclude appellate jurisdiction. The Court's broad discretionary power under Article 136 remains unimpaired by statutory provisions.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.