Pv Standing Order Form June 2013: Fill & Download for Free

The Cauvery dispute started in the year 1892, between the Madras Presidency (under the British Raj) and the Princely state of Mysore when they had to come to terms with dividing the river water between the two states.Since that day, Cauvery water has been a bone of contention between the two states. In the year 1910, both states started planning the construction of dams on the river. The issue was presided upon by the British who also decided which state would receive what share of the water. In 1924, an agreement was signed between the two states where the rules of regulation of the Krishnarajsagar dam were pointed out. In a report published by The Times of India, senior counsel AK Ganguly pointed out that the clause 11 of the agreement provided " for such modifications and additions as may be mutually agreed upon as the result of reconsideration'' after a passage of five decades, this revision clause was only applicable to projects other than KRS. The core of the agreement was the conditions governing the construction and operation of KRS and that could not be subject to any review. Hence the 1924 agreement gave both — the Madras presidency and the Mysore state — rights to use the surplus waters of the Cauvery.Madras had objected to the construction of the Krishnasagar dam and hence the agreement gave them the liberty to build the Mettur dam. However the agreement also put restrictions on the extent of area irrigated by Madras and Mysore using the river water.Geographical locationIf you look at the map of India, you will notice that the 765-km-long river cuts across two Indian states, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. It originates at Talacauvery in Kodagu district in Karnataka. While it flows mainly through Karanataka and Tamil Nadu, a lot of its basin area is covered by Kerala and the Karaikal area of Puducherry.According to the 1892 and the 1924 agreements the river water is distributed as follows:75 percent with Tamil Nadu and Puducherry23 percent to Karnatakaremaining to go to KeralaThe real problem started after the re-organisation of states post Indian independence. Before that, most matters were settled through arbitration and agreements. Through the late 20th century, Tamil Nadu opposed the construction of dams on the river by Karnataka, and the state in turn wanted to discontinue the water supply to Tamil Nadu. They argued that the 1924 agreement had lapsed when its 50 years were up in 1974 and considering that the river originated in Karnataka, they had better claim over the river. They argued that they were not bound by the agreement struck between the British empire and the Maharaja of Mysore.Tamil Nadu too had become heavily dependent on the river after they developed millions of agricultural land around the river. They argued that the livelihood of farmers would be affected if there was a change in the distribution of water. In 1972, the Centre agreed to appoint a committee who would collect statistics from each of the states that had the river basin — Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka.The fact-finding committee found that Tamil Nadu used 566 tmcft (thousand milli cubic feet), Karanataka used 177 tmcft.In 1976, the states arrived at an understanding that each state would continue using the water according to their previous usage, only now an additional 125 tmcft water would also be saved and shared.Karnataka argued heavily that the river water should be divided according to international rules, i.e. in equal portions. They suggested that 94 percent could be divided equally between them and the rest could be distributed to Kerala and Puducherry. However Tamil Nadu wanted to stick to the original distribution, according to the 1924 agreement.Political gains, protests and dharnasThe river dispute has attracted some of the most extreme protests and dharnas. In 1986, a farmer's association from Tanjavur, Tamil Nadu moved the Supreme Court (SC) and demanded that a tribunal be formed for the adjudication for the Cauvery water dispute.In 1990, the SC heard the petitions by the two states and asked them to complete negotiations. However the two failed to do so, following which the SC directed the Centre to constitute a tribunal and distribute the water between states.In 1991, the tribunal gave its award after calculating the average inflows into Tamil Nadu over 10 years — between 1980 and 1990. They directed Karnataka to ensure that 205 tmcft reach Tamil Nadu every year. They also directed Karnataka not to increase irrigated land area from the existing measure.However this decision was not well received by the people of the two states which simultaneously erupted into riots. The Karnataka government rejected the tribunal award and sought to get it annulled. However the SC struck down the ordinance and asked for the tribunal award to be upheld. Karnataka refused to oblige.Following this, the interim award was published in the Government of India gazette.The next few years saw enough rain for the states to not create an uproar. In 1993, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa went on a sudden fast at the MGR memorial in Chennai. She demanded Tamil Nadu's share of water as stipulated by the interim order.In 1995, Karnataka received very little rainfall and hence could not obey the interim order. Tamil Nadu, on the other hand, approached the SC demanding release of 30 tmcft of water. The SC and Karnataka did not entertain these demands. After a lot of to and fro, the SC asked the then prime minister PV Narsimha Rao, to intervene in the matter. Rao met with the chiefs of the two states and recommended a solution which was complied by the two states.In 1998, the Cauvery River Authority (CRA) was formed with the prime minister presiding as the chairperson and the chief ministers of the four states as members.In 2007, after 16 years, the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (CWDT) gave out their final award. The tribunal held valid the agreements of 1892 and 1924 executed between the government of Madras and Mysore. Karnataka protested the tribunal award and observed a state-wide bandh. The award was as follows:Tamil Nadu: 419 TMC (which had demanded 512 TMC),Karnataka: 270 TMC (which had demanded 465 TMC),Kerala: 30 TMC, andPondicherry: 7 TMCIn 2013, the Centre notified the final award of the CWDT. The government was mandated to constitute the Cauvery Management Board (CMB) with the gazette notification of the final award of the Tribunal.Chief Minister Jayalalithaa approached the Supreme Court for the formation of the Cauvery Management Board and Cauvery Water Authority, however this has proved to be a futile exercise. Recently the issue was again brought into the limelight when the Supreme Court directed the release of the Cauvery water into Tamil Nadu. This decision was widely protested by the people of Karnataka, especially farmers.On Monday the Supreme Court directed the Karnataka government to release 15,000 cusecs of Cauvery river water every day to Tamil Nadu for next 10 days to meet the demands of the summer crop in the state.A bench of Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Uday Umesh Lalit asked the Cauvery Supervisory Committee to look into Tamil Nadu's plea seeking direction to Karnataka to release 35 tmcft of water to make good for that much shortfall in the release of water for three months starting with 1 June to 30 August.While directing the release of 15,000 tmcft of water every day, the bench took note of the impact of non-availability of required water on the summer crops and the plight of farmers.The bench also said that Tamil Nadu in turn would proportionately give water to Puducherry and gave Tamil Nadu three days time to approach the Supervisory Committee with its claim of 35 tmcft of water from Karnataka.The court gave three days' time to Karnataka to respond to the plea by Tamil Nadu, while asking the Cauvery Supervisory Committee to examine the matter in four days and pass appropriate directions.Tamil Nadu contended that even if it was to accept the Karnataka stand that due to deficient rainfall in the current year, the inflow of water into four major reservoirs in the State is less, the same (shortfall in inflow of water into the reservoirs) could not have been more than 28 per cent.It also contended that applying the pro rate formula as per the final order of the Cauvery Water Dispute Tribunal, the state was entitled to 68 tmcft of water at Billigundulu from 1 June to 31 August.The court has directed listing of the matter for further hearing on 16 September.Hundreds of people, especially farmers staged protest demonstrations in the Mysuru region against the Supreme Court order.Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah convened an all-party meeting on Tuesday to discuss the apex court order.However the farmers in Tamil Nadu expressed happiness over the order. They hope this will be an interim order and the final order will give sufficient water for their crops, said a leader of farmer's association.Source: Cauvery water war: When did the dispute start and where are we now? - Firstpost

I've received an A2A for this but I must admit, I'm not someone who can make any valid conclusions on this issue.What I can contribute is the articles I had read and collected overtime so people can skim through the headlines or read and make up their own mind.There are a few things I believe:1. This controversy partly has its roots in history even before these two joined office, they were bound to clash because both of their existence depends on eliminating the other.2. The history is more important than the present events.3. Its a long story and not the whole of it is really relevant, so I've divided the answer in following sections:- A little bit of history (Who is Najeeb Jung, Who is Kejriwal plus whats happening in Delhi) - Up to 2013- A little more of history, laying the ground for Kejriwal vs. Jung (There have always been differences in the ways in which Kejriwal works and the ways in which Jung works, its evident from the time Kejriwal was first elected, to Kejriwal's resignation. BJP coming to power and threatening Jung's position while starting a major Reshuffle in Delhi's administration and weakening it in the process) - 2014- This year before the official Kejriwal vs. Jung (What is interesting about this year is the hidden role of the center to retain control and the work of the elected government in improving administration. For example: it is ironic how Modi was elevated to a top position in the party surpassing many old experienced leaders but Home Ministry finds it difficult to surpass senior IAS officers to appoint a junior officer that Kejriwal recommended to the post of his Chief Secretary) - 2015- Kejriwal vs. Jung is now official (What is relevant here is the timeline of events that are discussed about in April that lead up to the events of May and June causing the famous tussle between the LG & CM)- Conclusion - While Najeeb Jung is clearly upset over the fact that a CM who he does not report to should take an interest in what comes under his jurisdiction, AAP is upset because it needs to have more control over issues to fulfill the promises it made and ensure Delhi is not reverted to a full fledged UT as the Narendra Modi government seems to want.Details:A little bit of history1. Who is Najeeb Jung?For those of you who may not know him, he was born in 1951 and has done his post graduation in History from Delhi University and later did MA in Social Policy and Planning from London School of Economics, UK. He had joined Indian Administrative Services (IAS) in 1973 and served in Madhya Pradesh government and at several key positions for 22 years.Jung's real break came in 1984 when Madhavrao Scindia became the railway minister in the Rajiv Gandhi government. Scindia asked Jung and another officer, Asif Ibrahim (director, Intelligence Bureau), to become part of his immediate personal staff.Scindia did a lot of modernization of the railways but it was Jung who ran his office.In early 1990s, When Scindia became minister for civil aviation in PV Narasimha Rao's tenure, Jung was no longer available: he had become joint secretary (exploration) in the ministry of petroleum and natural gas. This is when the privatization of the Panna-Mukta oil fields (The Second Enron Scam: The Saga of Mukta-Panna Oil Fields By Prabir Purkayastha) took place and the contracts were given to a consortium. It was here that Jung came into contact with business houses.He then quit the civil services and went on to work with one of the private companies part of the same consortium.He also did a stint at the Asian Development Bank in the mid-1990s. His interest in energy took him to Oxford where he did a PhD in energy research.A corporate outlook helped: he worked as director (energy research) with the Reliance India-funded Observer Research Foundation, having worked in London earlier with Reliance Global Management Services.He returned in 2008-09 and, after doing this and that, was appointed vice-chancellor of the Jamia Millia University by then human resources minister, Kapil Sibal, overlooking the claim of Mushir ul Hasan, already in situ.Jung ran the university with an iron hand, sacked many students and also some teachers. To friends he said new ideas were needed on how to run universities and make them more productive. Jung also faced immense criticism from the University’s students and teachers for removing tenured professors, making senior positions contractual in an attempt to curb dissent and granting a minority status to a University famed for its non-denominational character.2. Who is Kejriwal? (Plus what is happening in Delhi)We all know him so I'll be very brief hereWhat exactly happened between the years 2010 - 2011In 2010, Kejriwal was protesting against corruption in the Commonwealth Games.Meanwhile in Delhi, Tejendra Khanna had completed three years as L-G Delhi when the CWG ended. Many were wanting him out including Sheila Dikshit and P. Chidambaram among the politicians.In 2011, Kejriwal joined several other activists, including Anna Hazare and Kiran Bedi, to form the India Against Corruption (IAC) group.Meanwhile in Delhi, March 2011 the then L-G had sent a nine-page report to the President on allegations of financial irregularities in the CWG scam against him.2011 also saw the discussion of the controversial splitting of MCD, a move supported by both Congress and BJP. The idea here was of course to weaken the administration and question the need for an elected government in Delhi.In Mar 2011, BJP to boycott meet on plan to split MCD - The Times of India. We had sought a change in the terms of reference. Why should it only look at MCD? There should be simultaneous dialogue on DDA, police and law and order. But since the terms of reference have not been amended, we have decided not to join the committee.In May 2011, Sheila Dixit's Delhi govt decides to split MCD into three parts, this was perceived as a smart manoeuvre to negate the BJP influence by ‘helping’ the Congress to get control of some part of the old municipality.In Nov 2011, Delhi Mayor Writes to Sonia Against MCD Split Opposing the proposed MCD split, Delhi Mayor Rajni Abbi shot off a letter to Congress chief Sonia Gandhi appealing to her to rise above party politics and "help realise the dreams of Rajiv Gandhi" by not supporting the demand of Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit. In her letter to Gandhi, the BJP leader said the demand for trifurcation will not only weaken the local self government but will also be harmful in the long run for Delhiites.In April 2012, BJP strikes gold in MCD elections, Cong stunned - The Times of IndiaIn November 2012, Kejriwal formally launched the Aam Aadmi Party.2013At the beginning of the year 2013, one thing was clear. Sheila Dixit's image was ruined already and Congress had realized they were going to have to let go of Delhi. Then LG Khanna had also come under criticism following the December 16 gang-rape of a 23-year-old girl, he also did not have a very cordial relationship with the Chief Minister as both were at loggerheads on range of issues.So, just five months before the national capital goes to assembly polls, probably as the last attempt by Congress to save their position in Delhi:On July 1, 2013 Dr. Najeeb Jung was named the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi by President of India. The first muslim to become Delhi's Governor. A lesser known newbie with a so called passion for service and no family connections in politics (kind of person Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi was looking for), Jung had said he had no apprehensions about his new job, "I have no thoughts. Life is a flowing river and it continues to flow" when he was appointed. In the media though, he was hailed Najeeb Jung: The man who may run Delhi.In November 2013 Sheila Dikshit failed to get full statehood for Delhi, says Harsh VardhanIn December 2013 the Delhi Legislative Assembly elections were also held.Lieutenant Governor Najeeb Jung has recommended the imposition of President's rule in Delhi among other options to break the deadlock over formation of a new government after assembly polls returned a hung verdict in the state.But in the same month, The Congress party had offered unconditional support to the AAP to form a government and Kejriwal formed government in Delhi.A Little more of History, laying the ground for Kejriwal vs. JungJan 2014: Arvind Kejriwal as Delhi CM demanded the suspension of three police personnel and sat on dharna outside Rail Bhawan. Jung then played a somewhat constructive role, holding dialogues and appealing to Kejriwal to call off the protest. During the dharna, the LG also sent home-cooked parathas for Kejriwal.(We don't know for sure if Kejriwal ate the parathas - Pun intended!)Next month..Feb 3: Chaired by Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, Delhi cabinet cleared the draft of the Jan Lokpal bill.Feb 6: Solicitor General Mohan Parasaran writes to Lt. Governor Najeeb Jung terming the Jan Lokpal Bill “unconstitutional”.Feb 7: Unfazed by solicitor general’s opinion, Kejriwal said he will write to Jung on plans to enact the Jan Lokpal bill without the centre’s concurrence.Feb 10: Kejriwal met Jung and discussed various issues relating to the Jan Lokpal bill. In a statement, the Lt. Governor’s office said to avoid any dispute in the matter and to obtain full clarity, Jung has referred the issue to the law ministry for a “final opinion”.Feb 12: Union law ministry upheld Jung’s stance that centre’s nod is mandatory for introducing the Jan Lokpal bill.Feb 13: Despite law ministry’s ruling, Kejriwal decides to introduce the bill in the assembly on the first day of the special session. However, the bill could not be introduced because of repeated disruptions in the house, which finally had to be adjourned.Feb 14: Kejriwal and his cabinet ministers resigned after the bill could not be introduced. While 42 legislators - including from the Bharatiya Janata Party, the Congress, the JD-U and an Independent - voted against its introduction, 27 AAP lawmakers were for it.Feb 17: Based on the report of the Delhi Lt Governor Najeeb Jung and the recommendation of the Union Cabinet on April 15, the President has accepted the resignation of Mr. Kejriwal and also approved the imposition of President’s rule while keeping the Legislative Assembly in suspended animation.Mar 14: Addressing the 91st Annual Convocation of University of Delhi, Jung noted that the country had been blessed with great leaders and thinkers, it was now a task of the youth to build the future of the country and for that they should not only dream big but achieve them as well.Apr 14: Hold election in Delhi, Prashant Bhushan urges Lt Governor Najeeb Jung | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & AnalysisMay 14: BJP wins Lok Sabha elections. Some news reports stated Sheila Dikshit and Najeeb Jung among 18 state governors who may lose post | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis and Kejriwal Meets Najeeb JungHarsh Vardhan demands full statehood for Delhi, from the new Prime Minister | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & AnalysisJune 14: Delhi saw power cuts while Piyush Goyal asks Najeeb Jung for plan to permanently end Delhi's power woes | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysisand Arvind Kejriwal meets Lt Governor Najeeb Jung over over e-rickshaw issuesJuly 14: The LG, who is in charge of administration of the Capital since February 14, said in an interview to a daily newspaper that he would call for elections the moment he was convinced that there was no possibility of any government being formed. Stating that elections were an expensive process, Jung had said that the city had been through two elections in the past six months and another election would stop the normal administration from functioning. A state can be under President's rule for up to two years, with extensions every six months.Meanwhile at Delhi administration, IAS Officers in Delhi government reshuffled | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis23 July 2014: Meanwhile at the center, Home Ministry and Centre issued a notification which favors to minimize the power of ACB of Delhi government.Aug 14: Govt formation efforts not over yet: Najeeb Jungand AAP accuses Central Government of minimising ACB's powersMeanwhile in Delhi's Admin departments, over 200 IAS officers get reshuffled.Chief Secretary D M Spolia, who was removed from the post when the Aam Aadmi Party came to power in the capital and was reappointed to the post in August replacing S K Srivastava. Of the 30 important departments, 12 departments have remained without their heads for more than a month now—Finance, Home, General Administration, Tourism, Planning, IT, Power, Social Welfare, Revenue, Higher Education, New Delhi Municipal Council and Chief Electoral Office.Such transfers have increased in frequency over the last six months and have just created confusion in the mind of the officer.Sep 14: Delhi L-G Najeeb Jung seeks permission from President to invite BJP to form government in DelhiOct 14: Meanwhile Delhi Administration sees a major reshuffle of IAS officers:Principal Secretary (Services) Shakuntala Gamlin has been given the additional charge of New Delhi Municipal Council Chairperson as current Chairman Jalaj Srivastava is going abroad for special training. Srivastava has been empanelled to the rank of Additional Secretary.Gamlin is likely to take charge on October 25. She has also been given the additional responsibility of General Administration after 1983-batch IAS officer Lalmalsawma, who was heading General Administration besides being the Principal Secretary of Social Welfare and Women and Child Development Department has been transferred to Mizoram.Environment Department Secretary Sanjiv Kumar will hold additional charge of Social Welfare and Women and Child Development Department.A 1984-batch officer, Arvind Ray has been holding the additional charge of Home Department after its head Archna Arora, a 1983 batch IAS officer, retired on September 30. Ray is the Principal Secretary (SC/ST/OBC/Minorities), and Chairman and MD of Delhi State Financial Development Corporation.S S Yadav, who heads Food and Supply Department as well as Directorate of Information and Publicity, holds the additional charge of the Tourism Department.While an IAS officer has been assigned to head two or three departments in Delhi administration, many officers serving outside the city are reluctant to join the administration that is witnessing “political uncertainty”.Nov 14: Delhi set for fresh polls, Union Cabinet approves dissolution of assembly | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & AnalysisHarsh Vardhan shunted to a low profile ministry, may not be BJP CM candidate for Delhi elections (remember he was the BJP guy publicly asking for full statehood!)As far as state administration is concerned:Nearly 60 per cent of the total budgetary allocation of Rs.16,700 crore, under the Plan head, remains un-utilised with only about a quarter of the current fiscal remaining. This while the expenditure under the non-Plan budget had crossed 60 per cent.Revenue collections declined by `3,000 crore in the current fiscal between April 14 and November 14.Of the 30 important departments, 12 were lying headless for the last three months which has led to the reshuffle of 14 IAS officers and eight Delhi, Andaman and Nicobar Islands Civil Service (DANICS) officers.The finance department was left lying almost headless after IAS officer MM Kutty joined Ministry of Environment and Forests.Shakuntala Gamlin, a 1984 batch IAS officer, who was already heading four departments, was temporarily given charge of the finance department.This year, before the official Kejriwal vs. JungJan 2015: Delhi sees more shuffles (Page on newindianexpress.com)Till Dec 2014, Shakuntala Gamlin was holding the charge of five departments. Now, Gamlin has been transferred to Power and Industries departments to replace IAS officer Arun Goyal was transferred to Mizoram in Oct 2014.Feb 2015: Exactly an year after he had resigned as Delhi Chief Minister, AAP Arvind Kejriwal took an oath as the CM again on February 14 at Ramlila Maidan after winning Delhi Elections.Kejriwal and Deputy CM Manish Sisodia had met Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh and requested him to appoint 1984 batch IAS officer Ramesh Negi as the chief secretary.The Home ministry rejected kejriwal's plea and appointed Sanjeev Nandan Sahai as the acting Chief Secretary of Delhi on February 28. (Sahai appointed as interim CS, Delhi after MHA's ‘No’ on Negi)March 2015: Home Minister Rajnath Singh approved the appointment of KK Sharma, currently serving as Chief Secretary of Delhi, to be the Delhi government’s top bureaucrat.April 2015:1 Apr 2015: Garbage piles up on Delhi roads, AAP-BJP continue fight2 Apr 2015: NGT orders Arvind Kejriwal-led govt to clean up garbage from Delhi streets04 Apr 2015: Page on dailypioneer.com5 Apr 2015: AAP to Relaunch Anti-Corruption Helpline in Delhi Today5 Apr 2015: Delhi Chief Secretary directs city administration to submit compliance of NGT orders | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis10 Apr 2015: Delhi farmers appeal to CM Arvind Kejriwal for conducting crop loss survey10 Apr 2015: Determined to make Delhi world-class city: Arvind Kejriwal11 Apr 2015: Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal announces compensation for farmers11 Apr 2015: AAP-Led Delhi Government Now Wants CCTVs in Police Stations11 Apr 2015: CM Arvind Kejriwal writes to Bassi, demands a say in policing matters13 Apr 2015: Truckers seek Kejriwal's intervention over NGT ban17 Apr 2015: BJP asks Delhi LG Najeeb Jung to probe AAP govt's Delhi Dialogue Commission | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis18 Apr 2015: AAP govt's new anti-corruption branch makes first arrests20 Apr 2015: Janta Ka Budget: AAP begins experiment in direct democracy20 Apr 2015: Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal suspends two NDMC employees for dereliction of duty23 Apr 2015: Farmer hangs himself at AAP rally28 Apr 2015: NGT Bans Burning of Waste in the Open in Delhi-NCR30 Apr 2015: Not obliged to send files to CM: JungMay 2015: This year, Kejriwal vs. Jung is now official01 May 2015: Arvind Kejriwal led AAP govt to enhance punishment for denial of minimum wages02 May 2015: Jung-Kejriwal faceoff: Don’t bother LG with all files, orders CM04 May 2015: Media conspiring to finish off Aam Aadmi Party, claims Kejriwal04 May 2015: Delhi L-G asserts his authority after Chief Minister order, launches Najeeb Jung against Arvind Kejriwal15 May 2015: Delhi Chief Secretary K K Sharma goes for 10-day leave.16 May 2015: Shakuntala Gamlin takes charge as Delhi chief secretary despite CM Arvind Kejriwal's directive19 May 2015: Delhi govt. replaces Principal Secretary Anindo Majumdar- Mr. Majumdar had cleared the appointment of Shakuntala Gamlin as acting CS for 10 days during the absence of K.K. Sharma25 May 2015: Delhi Chief Secretary K K Sharma resumes charge26 May 2015: Kejriwal vs Jung: Lt Governor must respect people’s mandate, says Delhi High Court- Anti-Corruption Bureau can act agianst Delhi Police: Arvind KejriwalJune 2015:1 Jun 2015: Shakuntala Gamlin writes to L-G Najeeb Jung: Minister Satyendra Jain putting pressure on me2 Jun 2015: Kejriwal-Jung Power Tussle Intensifies- Three inspectors and two sub-inspectors of Bihar Police have joined Delhi government's ACB after a request in this regard by the AAP government to Chief Minister Nitish Kumar's office. Reacting strongly to the decision, Jung's office virtually rejected the appointment of the five police officials from Bihar and reaffirmed that the ACB functions under his direct authority and control.8 Jun 2015: L-G Najeeb Jung appoints new chief of Delhi's Anti-Corruption Branch; AAP fumes9 Jun 2015: Kejriwal government rejects police commissioner appointed by L-G JungKejriwal government rejects police commissioner appointed by L-G Jung10 Jun 2015: Delhi govt moves to clip ACB chief MK Meena’s wings- This effectively means that MK Meena, who was appointed as joint commissioner in the ACB by lieutenant governor Najeeb Jung, will not able to take any key decisions on his own.19 Jun 2015: Complaint filed against Delhi ACB Chief Meena for alleged involvement in "20 lakh curtain purchase scam". - Janta Ka Reporter21 Jun 2015: Yogendra Yadav backs Arvind Kejriwal, says LG Najeeb Jung an agent of Centre for long - The Economic TimesConclusion: - Some of the politics behind Kejriwal vs. Jung has its roots in the age-old BJP vs. Congress battle and Delhi's age old status controversy, should Delhi be reverted to a UT or given full statehood?And some of it is an inevitable struggle between two different philosophies rather than a power-struggle that needs to be sorted by shifting the capital.On one side we have the bureaucrat trying to maintain Center's control over Delhi's administration, to save his own position (the point here is there will always be difference in opinion and there will always be a bureaucrat who has a job to save). He has worked in a certain manner for a considerable time and is used to seeing the big picture only (which today looks prettier than it did a few years back) and on the other side we have a young man, wanting to move at a very fast pace to clean up the debris that creates chaos in his immediate neighborhood, besides trying to save democracy in the state.Sources:Profile: Najeeb Jung, first Muslim to become Delhi’s Lt. GovernorNajeeb Jung's forefathers held positions of great powerArvind Kejriwal to form govt in Delhi, but can he deliver? - FirstpostSheila Dikshit and Najeeb Jung among 18 state governors who may lose post | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysishttp://www.khaleejtimes.com/kt-article-display-1.asp?section=international&xfile=data/international/2014/February/international_February373.xmlYouth should ensure that poorest find a voice in society: Lt Governor Najeeb Jung | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & AnalysisA case to dismiss Delhi’s Lieutenant Governor Najeeb Jung | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & AnalysisAAP-Jung tussle started a year ago - The Times of IndiaHeadless at Helm in Delhi AdministrationPage on newindianexpress.comDeadlock over Delhi chief secretary as Kejriwal stands by Ramesh NegiPage on indianexpress.comChallenges for a Mega CityDelhi doesn’t need StatehoodOther Quora answers about the issues:Rohit Nigam (रोहित निगम)'s answer to Has Delhi developed under the leadership of Arvind Kejriwal?Vanita Ashar's answer to Why do people still support Arvind Kejriwal even when we can see clearly how inefficient he is in running a good government?Vanita Ashar's answer to What makes Arvind Kejriwal think that without paying lakh corporation employees civil amenities will improve in Delhi?Vanita Ashar's answer to What is the complete story behind the turmoil going on in the Aam Aadmi Party centering around Yogendra Yadav and Prashant Bhushan?Gourav Pathak's answer to Why are the IAS officers applying to be transferred from Delhi?Rohit Nigam (रोहित निगम)'s answer to New Delhi: Is it true that the municipal corporation of Delhi (MCD) is a very corrupt body? Are there any proofs or experiences to justify it?Rohit Nigam (रोहित निगम)'s answer to According to the AAP, Najeeb Jung was initially a congress agent and then a BJP agent. Is this true?***********************************

The Cauvery dispute have two extremes from the both state in the beginning post independent and end of pre independence india.The Cauvery dispute start from the year 1892, the princely state of mysore and madras presidency when both state farmers had problem on Cauvery water sharing between them then british had to come to terms with dividing the river water between the two states. before that (The Chola king Karikalan has been immortalised as he constructed the bank for the Kaveri all the way from Puhar(Kaveripoompattinam) to Srirangam) nearly 2000 to 3000 years we have sharing Cauvery water,there is no major conflict or dispute between us in that time period.Since that day, Cauvery water has been a bone of contention between the two states. In the year 1910, both states started planning the construction of dams on the river. The issue was presided upon by the British who also decided which state would receive what share of the water. In 1924, an agreement was signed between the two states where the rules of regulation of the Krishnarajsagar dam were pointed out. senior counsel AK Ganguly pointed out that the clause 11 of the agreement provided “for such modifications and additions as may be mutually agreed upon as the result of reconsideration”after a passage of five decades, this revision clause was only applicable to projects other than KRS. The core of the agreement was the conditions governing the construction and operation of KRS and that could not be subject to any review. Hence the 1924 agreement gave both — the Madras presidency and the Mysore state — rights to use the surplus waters of the Cauvery.Madras had objected to the construction of the Krishnasagar dam and hence the agreement gave them the liberty to build the Mettur dam. However the agreement also put restrictions on the extent of area irrigated by Madras and Mysore using the river water.Geographical locationIf you look at the map of India, you will notice that the 765-km-long river cuts across two Indian states, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. It originates at Talacauvery in Kodagu district in Karnataka. While it flows mainly through Karanataka and Tamil Nadu, a lot of its basin area is covered by Kerala and the Karaikal area of Puducherry.According to the 1892 and the 1924 agreements the river water is distributed as follows:75 percent with Tamil Nadu and Puducherry23 percent to Karnatakaremaining to go to KeralaThe real problem started after the re-organisation of states post Indian independence. Before that, most matters were settled through arbitration and agreements. Through the late 20th century, Tamil Nadu opposed the construction of dams on the river by Karnataka, and the state in turn wanted to discontinue the water supply to Tamil Nadu. They argued that the 1924 agreement had lapsed when its 50 years were up in 1974 and considering that the river originated in Karnataka, they had better claim over the river. They argued that they were not bound by the agreement struck between the British empire and the Maharaja of Mysore.Tamil Nadu too had become heavily dependent on the river after they developed millions of agricultural land around the river. They argued that the livelihood of farmers would be affected if there was a change in the distribution of water. In 1972, the Centre agreed to appoint a committee who would collect statistics from each of the states that had the river basin — Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka.The fact-finding committee found that Tamil Nadu used 566 tmcft (thousand milli cubic feet), Karanataka used 177 tmcft.In 1976, the states arrived at an understanding that each state would continue using the water according to their previous usage, only now an additional 125 tmcft water would also be saved and shared.Karnataka argued heavily that the river water should be divided according to international rules, i.e. in equal portions. They suggested that 94 percent could be divided equally between them and the rest could be distributed to Kerala and Puducherry. However Tamil Nadu wanted to stick to the original distribution, according to the 1924 agreement.Representational image. AFPPolitical gains, protests and dharnasThe river dispute has attracted some of the most extreme protests and dharnas. In 1986, a farmer's association from Tanjavur, Tamil Nadu moved the Supreme Court (SC) and demanded that a tribunal be formed for the adjudication for the Cauvery water dispute.In 1990, the SC heard the petitions by the two states and asked them to complete negotiations. However the two failed to do so, following which the SC directed the Centre to constitute a tribunal and distribute the water between states.In 1991, the tribunal gave its award after calculating the average inflows into Tamil Nadu over 10 years — between 1980 and 1990. They directed Karnataka to ensure that 205 tmcft reach Tamil Nadu every year. They also directed Karnataka not to increase irrigated land area from the existing measure.However this decision was not well received by the people of the two states which simultaneously erupted into riots. The Karnataka government rejected the tribunal award and sought to get it annulled. However the SC struck down the ordinance and asked for the tribunal award to be upheld. Karnataka refused to oblige.Following this, the interim award was published in the Government of India gazette.The next few years saw enough rain for the states to not create an uproar. In 1993, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa went on a sudden fast at the MGR memorial in Chennai. She demanded Tamil Nadu's share of water as stipulated by the interim order.In 1995, Karnataka received very little rainfall and hence could not obey the interim order. Tamil Nadu, on the other hand, approached the SC demanding release of 30 tmcft of water. The SC and Karnataka did not entertain these demands. After a lot of to and fro, the SC asked the then prime minister PV Narsimha Rao, to intervene in the matter. Rao met with the chiefs of the two states and recommended a solution which was complied by the two states.In 1998, the Cauvery River Authority (CRA) was formed with the prime minister presiding as the chairperson and the chief ministers of the four states as members.In 2007, after 16 years, the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (CWDT) gave out their final award. The tribunal held valid the agreements of 1892 and 1924 executed between the government of Madras and Mysore. Karnataka protested the tribunal award and observed a state-wide bandh.Tamil Nadu: 419 TMC (which had demanded 512 TMC),Karnataka: 270 TMC (which had demanded 465 TMC),Kerala: 30 TMC, andPondicherry: 7 TMCIn 2013, the Centre notified the final award of the CWDT. The government was mandated to constitute the Cauvery Management Board (CMB) with the gazette notification of the final award of the Tribunal.Chief Minister Jayalalithaa approached the Supreme Court for the formation of the Cauvery Management Board and Cauvery Water Authority, however this has proved to be a futile exercise. Recently the issue was again brought into the limelight when the Supreme Court directed the release of the Cauvery water into Tamil Nadu. This decision was widely protested by the people of Karnataka, especially farmers.On Monday the Supreme Court directed the Karnataka government to release 15,000 cusecs of Cauvery river water every day to Tamil Nadu for next 10 days to meet the demands of the summer crop in the state.A bench of Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Uday Umesh Lalit asked the Cauvery Supervisory Committee to look into Tamil Nadu's plea seeking direction to Karnataka to release 35 tmcft of water to make good for that much shortfall in the release of water for three months starting with 1 June to 30 August.While directing the release of 15,000 tmcft of water every day, the bench took note of the impact of non-availability of required water on the summer crops and the plight of farmers.The bench also said that Tamil Nadu in turn would proportionately give water to Puducherry and gave Tamil Nadu three days time to approach the Supervisory Committee with its claim of 35 tmcft of water from Karnataka.The court gave three days' time to Karnataka to respond to the plea by Tamil Nadu, while asking the Cauvery Supervisory Committee to examine the matter in four days and pass appropriate directions.Tamil Nadu contended that even if it was to accept the Karnataka stand that due to deficient rainfall in the current year, the inflow of water into four major reservoirs in the State is less, the same (shortfall in inflow of water into the reservoirs) could not have been more than 28 per cent.It also contended that applying the pro rate formula as per the final order of the Cauvery Water Dispute Tribunal, the state was entitled to 68 tmcft of water at Billigundulu from 1 June to 31 August.The court has directed listing of the matter for further hearing on 16 September.Hundreds of people, especially farmers staged protest demonstrations in the Mysuru region against the Supreme Court order.Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah convened an all-party meeting on Tuesday to discuss the apex court order.However the farmers in Tamil Nadu expressed happiness over the order. They hope this will be an interim order and the final order will give sufficient water for their crops, said a leader of farmer's associationsource:firstpost