PAWAN KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THEY are heard.

(2.) BY this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is praying for the following relief: -

(3.) THE petitioner is challenging the constitutional validity of Narmada Control Authority and the Executive Member; Member (Environment and Rehabilitation); Member (Civil) and Member (Power) Recruitment Rules, 2013 (for short, the Rules, 2013), which have been framed by the Central Government in exercise of the powers under the provisions of a Scheme called Narmada Water Scheme, 1980 notified under Section 6(A) of the Inter -State Water Disputes Act, 1956. Under Section 2(2), (3) and (4) of the Scheme, the Central Government has framed the Rules, 2013. The vires of the Rules, 2013 is challenged essentially on the ground that for constitution of Narmada Control Authority as per Clause XVI.1(2) of the Award and as per Clause 2(a)(ix) to (xi) (a) of the Scheme, the manner of appointment of Members prescribed in the earlier Rules, 2010 laid down under Column 5, the criteria of "selection by Seniority on Merit", which has since been completely omitted in Rules, 2013. The Rules, 2013 are contrary to Clause xvi.1 (2) of the Award of the Tribunal, inasmuch as, the same contemplates three independent Members to be appointed from amongst the candidates not lower than the rank of Chief Engineer by the Central Government whereas the Rules, 2013 contemplate appointment of the officers much lower in rank to the one specified in the Award and Scheme contrary to the provisions of the Award, which is deemed to be a decree of the Apex Court of India.