An Analysis of Cauvery River Dispute

T.S. Chandrashekar

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

Part - II

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