Waheed Para questions JK Govt after HC annuls Act related to Hydropower Water Charges

The High Court has given a ruling against the the proposed levying of taxes on the usage of water by Hydropower projects. PDP MLA Waheed ur Rehman Para claims that this will amount to a loss of close to Rs 1000 Crore to the state exchequer.

Post Published By: Aditya Wadhawan

Updated : 30 October 2026, 5:18 PM IST

Waheed Para PDP leader targets J&K Govt over the HC Ruling on usage of water in Hydropower projects (Images: Dynamite News)

Srinagar: The Jammu and Kashmir government suffered a huge blow on Friday after the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court annulled the provisions of the Jammu and Kashmir Water Resources (Regulation and Management) Act, 2010, relating to the charging of water usage fees by Hydropower projects. The Division Bench of Justice Rajnesh Oswal and Justice Sanjay Dhar ruled that the tax on electricity generation was unconstitutional. It also prohibited the administration from imposing taxes on the grounds of water usage.

PDP MLA Waheed ur Rehman Para said, "This will amount to a loss of close to Rs 1000 Crore to the state exchequer. I would like to question the government on how they have handled this situation."

Problems raised

He also questioned the preparedness of the state as it appears that there hasn’t been any regular Advocate General for close to two years. He asked about the functioning of Law Department during the tenure of Chief Minister. Did they fight hard enough to protect the state’s finances he further said. Added to this he also drew a parallel with the demands of statehood. He questioned the Government's preparedness to fight for the states' interests.

Jammu and Kashmir has long been concerned about the control of its water resources. Given the large hydropower potential in the region, ensuring protection of local economic interests is a huge concern. However, it also brings into question that did the administration fully consider the constitutional aspect of the legislation before demanding payments for the last several years. Although the court ruled due to the constitutional restrictions of taxes, the financial implications and the government's strategy needs to be made clear.