CAUVERY DISPUTE

HAD there been a good monsoon, there would have been no Cauvery agitation this time around. It would not have been necessary for Karnataka to stop releasing waters to Tamil Nadu, disregarding a Supreme Court directive. Tamil Nadu also would not have petitioned the Supreme Court, accusing Karnataka of contempt of court.

Similar events had taken place in 2002 and 1995 when monsoon had failed. The interim order of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal in 1991 and the final order in 2007 have ignored the issue of water sharing between Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, principal beneficiaries of the rain-fed Cauvery, during a year of inadequate rainfall. However, it is doubtful that even if the tribunal had suggested a formula, Karnataka, which is the upper riparian state, would have honoured the arrangement.

Just like Karnataka Chief Minister Jagadish Shettar did last month, the then Chief Minister of Karnataka, SM Krishna, walked out of a meeting of the Cauvery River Authority (CRA) in 2002, when Tamil Nadu had filed a contempt petition in the Supreme Court against Karnataka for stopping the supply of waters before the period stipulated by the apex court.

There were agitations in both states in 2002 over the issue, which received vocal support from political parties and various other quarters, including film actors who enjoy iconic status in their respective states. Fortunately, monsoon was good in 2004 and washed away the bitterness.

This time, while the major political parties of Karnataka — the BJP, Congress and Janata Dal (S) — have tried to outdo one another to show their concern, actors, barring actor-turned-politician Ambareesh, have not jumped into the fray.

In Tamil Nadu, the megastar Rajnikanth (born to Marathi-speaking parents in Bangalore and did his elementary education in Kannada) identifies with the Tamil cause, but has refrained from speaking out.

The current crisis can be traced to September 19 when the river authority headed by the Prime Minister asked Karnataka to release 9,000 cusecs of waters every day to Karnataka till October 15. Tamil Nadu had demanded 24,000 cusecs while the Supreme Court had asked Karnataka to release 10,000 cusecs. The CRA awarded the release of 9,000 cusecs. After the order was upheld by the court, Karnataka started releasing the waters. This sparked off protests in Karnataka, forcing it to stop the supply on October 8, saying it did not have enough waters.

The history of the Cauvery dispute goes back to over 100 years. In the middle of the 19th century, the princely state of Mysore wanted to build new irrigation projects. This caused anxiety to Madras, which was dependent on Cauvery. The then British government of Madras took up the case with the Mysore government and the Government of India. An agreement was reached in 1892.

River tribunal

In 1910, Mysore formulated a proposal for a reservoir on the Cauvery and sought the consent of the Madras government, which opposed it. The dispute was referred for arbitration. The proceedings began in 1913 and concluded in 1914. The award was not acceptable to Madras. After negotiations, another agreement was signed in 1924. Fresh disputes arose between the two states (now known as Tamil Nadu and Karnataka) in the late 60s when Karnataka started constructing four irrigation projects on the tributaries of the Cauvery.

In August 1971, Tamil Nadu filed a suit before the Supreme Court, with a prayer to direct the Centre to constitute a tribunal as per the provisions of the Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956, to restrain Karnataka. In 1990, the court asked the Centre to set up a tribunal.

While the tribunal’s interim order prescribing 205 TMC (thousand million cubic feet) of waters to Tamil Nadu annually led to protests in Karnataka, its final order in 2007, asking for 192 TMC of waters for Tamil Nadu, also failed to satisfy the parties concerned. Both awards had stipulated the monthly release figures of water.

Though Tamil Nadu got relief whenever it approached the court, Karnataka has cut off the water supply, resulting in bad blood. The issue is an emotional one in Karnataka and political parties cannot ignore the sentiment once activists hit the streets. The late S Guhan, a civil servant of Tamil Nadu, is often remembered in this connection. He felt that a people-to-people dialogue had to be initiated to resolve the issue. In 1992, he convened a meeting that was attended by politicians and farmers. A decade after his death, the Madras Institute of Development Studies (MIDS) and representatives of farmers from both states formed the Cauvery Family. The recent row has seen cracks developing in this forum.

What is the dispute Karnataka, the upper riparian state, has stopped releasing Cauvery waters to Tamil Nadu, disregarding a Supreme Court directive. Tamil Nadu has petitioned the apex court, accusing Karnataka of contempt of court. The interim order of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (1991) and the final order in 2007 have ignored the issue of water sharing during a year of inadequate rainfall. The lacunae have returned to haunt the states again and again. How it all began 19th century: Mysore wanted to build irrigation projects 1892: British government of Madras took up issue with Government of India; agreement between Madras and Mysore governments 1910: Mysore formulated proposal for a reservoir; sought consent of Madras 1914: Conflict referred for arbitration; award not acceptable to Madras 1924: Another agreement between Madras and Mysore Late 60s: Fresh dispute arose when Karnataka started work on irrigation projects on tributaries 1971: TN moved Supreme Court to direct Centre to set up tribunal to restrain Karnataka 1990: Supreme Court asked Centre to set up tribunal 1991: Interim order prescribes 205 TMC of waters to Tamil Nadu annually 2007: Final order allows for 192 TMC of waters for Tamil Nadu

Karnataka’s claims Erstwhile Mysore was not allowed to exercise its powers over the utilisation of waters for irrigation because of protests by the lower riparian province of Madras controlled by the British. Storage of the waters could be achieved only in 1931, after the construction of the Krishnaraja Sagara Dam (capacity 44.8 TMC). By 1934, Madras had completed the Mettur Dam for storing 93.5 TMC of Cauvery waters, enabling cultivation of over 3,00,000 acres of new area. After the formation of Karnataka, covering the areas of Mysore and others, over 42 per cent of the drainage area of the Cauvery basin fell in Karnataka. Hilly regions of the Western Ghats receive heavy rainfall, but Mysore, Mandya, Hassan, Tumkur, Bangalore and Kolar are plagued by drought. Eastern basin in Tamil Nadu receives heavy north-east monsoon while the central part receives both south-west and north-east monsoon. Tamil Nadu’s stand Karnataka has constructed Kabini, Hemavathy, Harangi and Suvarnavathy reservoirs, besides other projects, for storing the Cauvery waters, much beyond the limit stipulated in the 1924 agreement. This has diminished the supply of waters to Tamil Nadu, adversely affecting the Ayacutdars (farmers) who have been dependent on the Cauvery for centuries.