Hot waters

The Cauvery Basin is spread across Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala and the Union Territory of Puducherry. The water dispute relates to utilisation of the waters in the Cauvery Basin. Tamil Nadu says Karnataka violated the 1892 and 1924 agreements by building dams and expanding its agricultural area.

Karnataka says these are pre-Independence colonial agreements imposed by the government on the maharaja of Mysore, they are not binding and that it has the right to utilise the water for its own agricultural purposes. The 1924 agreement is deemed to have lapsed after 50 years, says Karnataka. From the early 1970s, there has been friction between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu over sharing of the Cauvery waters, with a major anti-Tamil riot breaking out over the issue in 1991.

8226; When was the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal set up?

It was set up in 1990 following a petition by the Cauvery Delta Farmers Welfare Association, led by S. Renganathan, which moved the Supreme Court in 1983, seeking a direction for setting up of a tribunal. The then M.G. Ramachandran government in Tamil Nadu impleaded itself in support of the petition. The tribunal was to adjudicate the dispute and pass an award and allocate water among the four riparian states.

8226; When was the interim order given and what was the order?

The interim order was passed on June 25, 1991. It ordered Karnataka to release 205 tmcft every year at the Mettur Reservoir that falls within Tamil Nadu based on a monthly/weekly schedule to ensure the availability of the quantum of prescribed water in a whole year.

8226; What is the final award?

After 16 years, the tribunal, comprising Chairman Justice N.P. Singh and members N.S. Rao and Sudhir Narain, has passed an unanimous final award. While determining the total availability of water in the Cauvery Basin at 740 thousand million cubic feet tmcft at the Lower Coleroon Anictu site on the basis of 50 per cent dependability, the tribunal apportioned the total as follows: Tamil Nadu 419 tmcft whereas it had been demanding 512 tmcft, Karnataka 270 tmcft its demand was 465 tmcft, Kerala 30 tmcft and Puducherry 7 tmcft.

Karnataka has to release 182 tmcft at the Billigundulu gauging station, in addition to 10 tmcft for environmental purposes. From its share of 192 tmcft, TN will release 7 tmcft to Puducherry.

8226; Does Tamil Nadu get 419 or 192 tmcft?

The tribunal has proceeded on the basis that the total availability in the Cauvery Basin across all the states and the Union Territory concerned is 740 tmcft. It apportions this quantum among the three states and the union territory based on their requirements. The tribunal has also determined the quantum that each state can utilise. As far as Tamil Nadu is concerned, it will get 192 tmcft from the Karnataka side and the remaining requirement will be met by the rainfall and flows within its own territory.

8226; So how much does Tamil Nadu get from Karnataka each year?

The tribunal has fixed Billigundulu gauging station near the border, 60 km upstream of Mettur, as the point of release. Apart from 192 tmcft which Karnataka has to release at this point, the tribunal has given a finding that an additional 25 tmcft will be available through rainfall in the intervening distance between Billigundlu and Mettur within Tamil Nadu. As a result Tamil Nadu gets 217 tmcft of which it has to release 7 tmcft to Puducherry. Hence the Tamil Nadu government8217;s claim that it will get a little more than what was specified in the interim award of 205 tmcft.

8226; What happens during distress years?

The tribunal has not given a detailed distress sharing formula. It merely says that in case the yield of the Cauvery Basin is less in a distress year when rainfall is low, the allocated shares shall be proportionately reduced among the riparian states and Puducherry.

8226; Who will regulate the releases?

A monitoring authority, to be constituted soon, will monitor the releases.

8226; How has Tamil Nadu reacted to the final award?

The DMK government as well as much of the farming community in Tamil Nadu has expressed 8216;satisfaction8217; with the award and has even termed it 8216;a fair one.8217;

8226; Why is Karnataka unhappy?

Karnataka feels that the tribunal8217;s allocation for it is inadequate and excessive for Tamil Nadu.

8226; Is there scope for appeal?

The parties have 90 days to seek clarification. And the tribunal is bound to give its ruling on this within a year. The parties can also approach the Supreme Court by a special leave.