ISSN (Print) - 0012-9976 | ISSN (Online) - 2349-8846

A+| A| A-

Interpreting Narmada Judgment

In judging the Narmada Bachao Andolan case, the Supreme Court, using the 'separation of powers' doctrine, side-stepped the issues of entitlement and suffering, and chose to concern itself only with the issues of relief and rehabilitation. It was only on the latter issue that the court was willing to hear the representation of the NBA. The weak interrogation of the doctrine of separation of powers allowed the court to abdicate much of its responsibility to those affected by the Narmada dam project.

Dear reader,

To continue reading, become a subscriber.

Explore our attractive subscription offers.

Click here

Comments

(-) Hide

EPW looks forward to your comments. Please note that comments are moderated as per our comments policy. They may take some time to appear. A comment, if suitable, may be selected for publication in the Letters pages of EPW.

Back to Top