SC Rejects PIL to Declare Indus Waters Treaty Unconstitutional

“This treaty is of 1960 and this treaty has held good for more than half a century,”said Chief Justice JS Khehar.

The Indus waters agreement was executed on 19 September 1960 between India, Pakistan and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development or the World Bank. (Photo Courtesy: Twitter/@faryaalshakeel)

The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a PIL seeking declaration of the Indus Waters Treaty between India and Pakistan as illegal and unconstitutional.

“This treaty is of 1960 and this treaty has held good for more than half a century,” a bench headed by Chief Justice JS Khehar said, while dismissing the PIL filed by lawyer ML Sharma in his personal capacity.

The bench, also comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and SK Kaul, however, made clear that the order dismissing the PIL "does not put any impairment on anybody".

The clarification came when Sharma said that the dismissal of the PIL should not put any restriction in the way of the government if it wants to review the Indo-Pak water pact.

During the brief hearing, it was argued that the Indus water pact was not a treaty at all as the same was not signed in the name of the President of India.

It was a tripartite agreement between three leaders and void ab initio (illegal at the outset) and hence cannot be acted upon.

ML Sharma, Lawyer

The court said that it has perused the entire petition and does not wish to agree with it.

Also Read: Teesta Waters Treaty Unlikely to Be Inked During Hasina’s Visit

The Indus water agreement was executed on 19 September 1960 between India, Pakistan and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development or the World Bank. Besides Nehru, the then Pakistan president Mohammad Ayub Khan and WAB Iliff for the World Bank were its signatories.

The apex court had last year refused to grant an urgent hearing on the PIL, saying there was no urgency in the matter while Sharma, who filed the PIL in his personal capacity on the issue, to "keep politics aside".

Sharma, in his PIL, had referred to Article 77 of the Constitution and said it mandates that all executive action of the government shall be expressed to be taken in the name of the President.

However, in the case of the 1960 Indus waters treaty, it has been signed by then prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru and "nowhere it is declared that the said agreement/treaty has been signed in the name of the President of India", the plea had said.

“According to the ministry of external affairs documents, nowhere disclosed further that the said agreement has been signed by the Jawaharlal Nehru for the President of India...,” it had said.

Also Read: Where Would India Store Indus Water Once it Stops the Supply?

Sharma had said, "According to the impugned agreement 80 per cent water goes to Pakistan, which is a serious injury to the fundamental right of the citizens of India coupled with further financial and natural injuries to national interest."

The treaty was "against the national interest and violated fundamental right of the citizen of India effecting their life and livelihood", it had said.

Join The Quint on WhatsApp. Type “JOIN” and send to 9910181818.