JUDGMENT : 1. Learned Attorney General has raised a preliminary objection based on Article 262 of the Constitution of India read with Section 11 of the Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956 to canvass that this Court has no jurisdiction to go into the matter arising out a water dispute. That question is squarely under consideration of a Constitution Bench in the Cauvery Water Dispute which matter stands adjourned to 15th July, 1997. 2. During the course of hearing arguments on the preliminary objection, Mr. P.P. Rao, learned Senior Counsel, has drawn our attention to an order dated 8th April, 1993 made in Civil Appeal No. 2614 of 1983, State of Rajasthan v. State of Gujarat and others, which reads : "The State of Rajasthan in this appeal has challenged the Narmada Water Disputes Tribunal's award. Mr. Nariman, learned senior counsel appearing for the State of Gujarat has raised a preliminary objection that in view of Article 262(2) read with Section 11 of the Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956 this Court has no jurisdiction to go into the merits of the award given by the Tribunal constituted under the Inter-State Water Disputes Act. We are of the view that the question pertaining to the interpretation of Article 262(2) be placed before the Constitution Bench for adjudication and decision. The orders of the Hon'ble the Chief Justice may be obtained in this respect in due course." 3. In our opinion it is, therefore, appropriate that the preliminary objection raised in these cases be also considered by the Constitution Bench hearing the Cauvery Water Dispute. 4. Let the cases be placed before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice for appropriate orders.