In this article an attempt has been made to explain the Cauvery Dispute to the readers of OurKarnataka.Com. We except everybody will enjoy this article.
Part - I
Four Southern States of India are
directly involved in the Cauvery dispute:Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Pondicherry
and Kerala. Use and development of Cauvery Waters were regulated by agreements
of 1892 and 1924 between the erstwhile Princely State of Mysore and province
of Madras. The State of Kerala was not a party to this agreement. The 1924
Agreement expired at the end of 50 years and became open for review in
the light of experience gained and further possibility of extension of
irrigation etc.
With the re-organisation of States in 1956, the former princely State of Coorg, which was partly in the Cauvery basin, became part of Karnataka and some areas of Malabar in Madras State in the Cauvery basin became part of Kerala. The then French territory of Pondicherry which is also served by Cauvery became a Union Territory. Thus presently, Kerala, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry are interested States for sharing the Cauvery Waters.
For Karnataka and Tamil Nadu Cauvery issue has become an emotional issue. Tamil Nadu does not control any of the Cauvery headwaters, yet it is in possession of the tributaries Bhavana and the Moyar. There is peace in times of good rains. However, when the monsoons fail, violence erupts, from streets of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu to Delhi.
Since 1974 when a 50 year old agreement between the Madras presidency and the princely Mysore state collapsed the Cauvery River Dispute has been a serious issue. The Karnataka Government asserts that the 1924 agreement entailed a discontinuation of the water supply to Tamil Nadu after 50 years. The conflict between the two States compounds a century old dispute over the vital interests of farmers in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka.
Failed monsoons in 1995 ignited old debates between the two states over water access. The dispute is still in progress in Supreme Court. During 1995, 1996 the issue has had become much more complicated and intense due to the displacement of local farmers who depend on the water from the Cauvery River for their livlihood. Crops had withering, and tempers were inflamed. Threats of violence had transformed into aggressive protests ending in death, and still there is no solution.
Here is the position of both the State’s Government on Cauvery Issue
Karnataka’s Position:
When the failed monsoons had created severe drought situations in much of Karnataka. The reservoirs of the Cauvery Basin only reached 23.2 TMC feet of water. The total requirement for Karnataka in 1994 was 24 TMC of water. Therefore, Southern Karnataka and Bangalore City are short of drinking water. If Karnataka had to release water to Tamil Nadu it would be at the expense of Karnataka's economic growth and its own citizenry.
Karnataka contends that the shared
river dispute should be made a national issue. It refuses to accept the
decisions of the Tribunal because it is not an independent decision making
body outside of the influence of either state. Karnataka asserts that it
will not abide by any decisions until a National Water Policy is established
that would apply to all shared water resources, not just the Cauvery. Karnataka
still rejects the Tribunal. The state is now suggesting that an independent
monitoring committee be established. The Committee would be called the
Cauvery River Committee and should take the form of a regulatory authority.
The experts on the Committee should be outside the control of either state
and the Tribunal. The Karnataka Government has suggested that the Committee
be comprised of high ranking people with expertise in law, administration,
agriculture, and irrigation engineering
Tamil Nadu’s Position:
Tamil Nadu depends on agriculture as the primary means of sustenance. It relies on the Cauvery River to sustain its agricultural needs. Beyond the Cauvery, Tamil Nadu has very few resources for complex irrigation systems to maintain its water supply. It is mandatory for Karnataka to abide by the decisions made by the Tribunal and Supreme Court. Karnataka is not above the law, and should be made to release at least 205 TMC of water to Tamil Nadu to save standing crops. Tamil Nadu asserts that water sharing is a national issue that requires the intervention of the Government of India.
Tamil Nadu is now shifting its case from the Supreme Court and Tribunal to the Parliament. Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi had threatened mass agitation if Karnataka does not comply with the Supreme Court's mandate.
Click
For Part - II
| Home | Feedback/Contribution | Kannada Section | Library |
Supreme Court and The Tribunal
In April 1991, the Supreme Court
of the Government of India reassigned a tribunal to settle the dispute
as mandated in the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act. The Tribunal heard
arguments from both states, and reached the decision that Karnataka must
release 205 TMC of water from the Cauvery reservoirs to Tamil Nadu on a
monthly basis. However Karnataka declined to accept the ruling of the Tribunal.
The Government of Karnataka argued that the Tribunal issued a decision
that was not implementable. Due to failed monsoons, many parts of Karnataka
were left without adequate water supplies. If the government were to release
more than 100 TMC of water to Tamil Nadu, then it would be at the cost
of its own people. The rejection of the Tribunal's decision pushed
the negotiations on a downward spiraling path that eventually led to aborted
talks.
However in 1995, the monsoons failed to fill the Cauvery tributaries possessed by Tamil Nadu. On January 1, 1996, Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Roa asked Karnataka to release an immediate six tmcft (one thousand million cubic feet) of water to Tamil Nadu to save the standing crops. In addition, the Prime Minister announced the immediate formation of an expert council to "spot assess" the status of the standing crop of both states to include the level of water needed to sustain the crops. It should be noted that despite the stalemate in negotiations, Karnataka has been releasing water from the Cauvery River to Tamil Nadu in installments for the last twenty years. The dispute is over the quantity of water to be released..
Constitutional Provisions To solve Inter State Water Disputes
RESOLUTION OF INTER-STATE WATER DISPUTES THROUGH NEGOTIATIONS
Following actions/steps are being undertaken so that inter-State disputes are resolved for optimum development of water resources :-
i) Encouraging bilateral/trilateral
agreements among the basin States.
ii) Enacting Legislation’s to constitute
Corporations/Boards for development of river basins.
iii) Securing basin development
through Inter-State Agreements on particular projects.
iv) Setting up of Joint Control
Boards.
v) Arranging consensus in Zonal
Councils on vexed non-technical, administrative issues.
Tribunals
The Central Government has set up
five Inter-State Water Disputes Tribunals so far, namely :-
Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal
(In April, 1969)
Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal
(In April, 1969)
Narmada Water Disputes Tribunal
(In October, 1969)
Ravi and Beas Waters Tribunal (In
April, 1986)
Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal
(In June, 1990)
While the first three Tribunals have already given their final awards, the remaining 2 Tribunals are still adjudicating the issues referred to them.
CAUVERY WATER DISPUTES TRIBUNAL
The Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal was established under the formal request of Government of Tamil Nadu in July, 1986 under the provisions of Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956 for constitution of a Tribunal. Notification to this effect was issued on 2nd June, 1990 and the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal was established having the headquarters at New Delhi.
IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERIM ORDER
The Prime Minister convened meetings on 6th and 7th August, 1998 with the Chief Ministers of Cauvery basin States in which the scheme for implementation of interim order of Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal was finalized. The scheme was notified in the Official Gazette on 11.08.1998.
CONSTITUTION OF THE CAUVERY RIVER AUTHORITY
(1) There shall be an Authority under this scheme to be known as the Cauvery River Authority (hereinafter referred to as the Authority).
(2) The Authority shall consist of the following :
(a) Prime Minister of India - Chairperson
(b) Chief Minister of Karnataka
- Member
(c) Chief Minister of Kerala - Member
(d) Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu
- Member
(e) Chief Minister of Pondicherry
- Member
(3) The Secretary in-charge of the
Ministry of the Central Government dealing with water resources shall be
the Secretary of the Authority.
POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF THE AUTHORITY
(1) The role of the Authority shall
be to give effect to the implementation of the interim order dated 25th
June, 1991 of the Tribunal and all its related subsequent orders.
(2) The Authority shall frame rules
and regulations for the conduct of its business.
(3) The Authority may convene meetings
as and when necessary.
MONITORING COMMITTEE
Under the Authority, there shall
be a Monitoring Committee with the following composition :
(a) Secretary-in-charge of the Ministry
of Central Chairman Government dealing with water resources
(b) The Chief Secretary of Karnataka/
Kerala / Members Tamil Nadu/ Union Territory of Pondicherry or his duly
nominated representative
(c) Chairman, Central Water Commission
Member
(d) One officer each, not below
the rank of a Chief Members Engineer, to represent the States of Karnataka,
Kerala and Tamil Nadu and the Union Territory of Pondicherry
to be nominated by the respective State Governments or the Union territory
administration
(e) Chief Engineer, Central Water
Commission Member- Secretary
| Home | Feedback/Contribution | Kannada Section | Library |