The Hindu : 'Technical panel should take over Karnataka reservoirs'

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, Jul 11, 2002

Southern States

Southern States - Karnataka

'Technical panel should take over Karnataka reservoirs'

By J. Venkatesan

NEW DELHI July 10. In its comprehensive suit, Tamil Nadu has submitted that it was constrained to move the Supreme Court as in spite of various requests made for urgent release of water in compliance of the interim order, Karnataka had failed to release any water.

The suit pointed out that Karnataka was unjustified in utilising the water for its summer irrigation requirements even as Tamil Nadu was suffering for want of irrigation supplies for its `kuruvai' crop.

The release of waters of the Cauvery was being made at the "whims of Karnataka" inasmuch as only the surplus water flows in to the Mettur reservoir. The suit stated that Karnataka had repeatedly refused to perform its obligation to release waters in terms of the interim award.

The scheme framed by the Union of India for the implementation of the interim order had failed to ensure and protect the rights of inhabitants of Tamil Nadu.

In view of this, as an interim measure, Tamil Nadu wanted the court to give a direction for the constitution of a committee of technical officers to take over the regulation of the reservoirs and/or structures in the Cauvery basin in Karnataka to ensure due compliance of the tribunal's interim award in the event of Karnataka failing to comply with the order.

The Tamil Nadu Government cited several instances in the past to show how the meetings of both the Monitoring Committee and the Cauvery River Authority (CRA), constituted pursuant to the Supreme Court's orders in 1998, had failed to yield any concrete result.

Similarly, the State was reasonably apprehensive that even if the meeting of the CRA took place whether any decision would be taken at the meeting to release water and whether Karnataka would give effect to that decision. Cauvery was an inter-State river and Tamil Nadu had as much right to the use of its water as Karnataka. Merely for the reason that Karnataka was an upper riparian State, it had no exclusive right to impound the waters flowing through its territory as it pleased.

The present storage position in the Mettur reservoir was insufficient to meet the requirement of the `kuruvai' crop, Tamil Nadu said in its suit and sought, among other reliefs, a decree declaring that the "the Cauvery water (implementation of the order of 1991 and all subsequent related orders of the Tribunal) Scheme, 1998 as notified by the Central Government on August 11, 1998, had become ineffective and were no longer in conformity with Sec. 6 A of the Inter State Water Disputes Act, 1956''; A decree of mandatory injunction directing the Centre to frame either a new scheme in substitution or replacement of the 1998 scheme or an additional scheme making adequate provisions therein for all matters necessary to give effect to the interim order; A permanent injunction restraining Karnataka from unilaterally reducing the weekly/monthly releases of water from the quantum stipulated in the interim order except after obtaining prior permission either from the Apex Court or from the Tribunal or such other Authority; To restrain Karnataka from impounding at its will the Cauvery waters flowing through its territories to the detriment of Tamil Nadu;

An interim direction to Karnataka to ensure due compliance of the tribunal's interim order; to make good the shortfall during June and in the subsequent months in the event of any further shortfall and to direct the Union of India and the CRA to ensure that Karnataka complied with the direction of release of water.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Southern States

Stories in this Section

Civic scam: embezzlers to face action

Agitation against mining in W.Ghats intensifies

'Technical panel should take over Karnataka reservoirs'

Davangere CMC acquires tankers to supply water

Scheme to harness rivers to help UK, DK

Residents criticise decision