Cauvery River | 'We Don't Possess Expertise' : Supreme Court Seeks CWMA Report On TN-Karnataka Dispute

A bench of Justice BR Gavai, Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Prashant Kumar, while stating that they do no posses the expertise to decide the matter, called for the report of the concerned authorities.  

"We do not possess any expertise on the matter. Apart from that, Learned ASG Aishwarya Bhatti informs us the that the meeting of the CWRC is to be held on Monday to consider the discharge of water for next fortnight. It is submitted that thereafter, the matter will go to CWMA. We find that it will be appropriate that the CWMA submits it's report as to whether the directions issued by it for discharge of water has been complied with or not. In the meantime, the orders with regard to discharge of water for the next fortnight will also be available. ASG is requested to communicate this order to the CWMA to obtain its report prior to next Friday.”  the Court said in its order. 

The Court also recorded the submission of the State of Karnataka that the orders passed by the CWMA are adverse to its interests and an application has been filed for reduction of the water allotted to the State of Tamil Nadu. The Court also recorded the submission of the State of Tamil Nadu that it is the grievance of the state that the water allotted to it is much less and they have requested the authorities for enlargement of their share.

Sr. Adv Shyam Divan submitted on behalf of the Karnataka state that it has been a distressing year for the state and there has been shortage of rainfall and a cutback is inevitable.

Sr Adv Mukul Rohatgi submitted for state of Tamil Nadu that the immediate problem was that the authority had said that 15,000 cusecs shall be released for 15 days which is set to expire today. "This was modified by the second authority stating that 10,000 cusecs should be released and this expires today." He submitted that, if the matter is not heard by the Apex Court the further discharge of water will stop. "We are running out of water as of now, the 15 days earlier ordered has expired. Whatever they have said let it continue, I am seeking a pro tem order. There is a huge deficit, I am getting a pittance” he said. 

Sr Adv CS Vaidyanathan submitted that the order of the authorities is not being complied with. However Sr. Adv Mohan Katarki countered this claim and submitted that there has been compliance. 

“It is your word against theirs” Justice Gavai said.

Sr Adv Rohatgi stated “Milord can ask the Authority to submit a report to show the current status.”

Counter Affidavit By State Of Karnataka

The State of Karnataka in its counter affidavit had referred to Tamil Nadu's plea as wholly 'misconceived'. In its reply to the prayers of Tamil Nadu, Karnataka has stated that Tamil Nadu's application is wholly misconceived as it is based on an incorrect assumption that the current water year is a normal water year and not a distressed water year. Karnataka stated that rainfall has been lesser by 25% and inflow into four reservoirs of Karnataka has been lesser by 42.5%. In this context, Karnataka has asserted that the stipulated release of water shall not be applicable to this year.

The State of Karnataka has further argued that the urgency pleaded by Tamil Nadu on the ground of saving standing crops is misleading. It has argued that the permissible area of Kuruvai rice crop which started on 12th June and goes up to end of September requires 32.27 TMC as estimated by the Cauvery water dispute Tribunal. Thus, the water requirement up to August 23 was 22.44 TMC and in the remaining period of the season would be about 9.83 TMC. Stating that Tamil Nadu has drawn excessive water, it has been stated that the 'irresistible conclusion' is that Tamil Nadu has drawn more water for cultivating large area of Kuruvai by exceeding the limit of 1.85 lakh acres as prescribed by the tribunal.

As per the affidavit, during the current water year, the south-west monsoon has largely failed so far. Due to the same, a 'distress condition' has arisen in the Cauvery basin in Karnataka. It adds–

"Karnataka, therefore, is not obliged to and it cannot be compelled to ensure water as per the stipulated relief is prescribed for the normal year."

The State of Karnataka has also argued that Tamil Nadu has misused the carryover storage as the total water in the hands of Tamil Nadu should have been 96.545 TMC. However, Tamil Nadu has maintained a live storage of only 21.655 TMC. Thus, it has drawn 69.777 TMC excessively. The same, it has been stated, is in breach of the final order of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal.

Arguing that Karnataka's needs are at a risk, the affidavit has highlighted that the total water available at the disposal of Karnataka in four reservoirs is not sufficient. It emphasises–

"The entire current storage plus likely inflow is not sufficient for the crops in Karnataka in for meeting the drinking water requirements of towns and villages including the mega city of Bangalore which is the technological hub of the world. Hence, Karnataka is reasonable needs are at a serious risk."

Finally, it has been contended that Karnataka has complied with the orders of the Cauvery Water Management Authority. Stating that the authority had directed for ensuring of 10,000 cusecs per day for the next 15 days, it is highlighted that the State government of Karnataka issued directions for the release of water immediately and that the water released from the reservoirs takes 2 to 3 days to reach the interstate border at Biligundlu.

Background

The Tamil Nadu government had approached the Supreme Court on August 14, 2023 seeking its intervention in compelling Karnataka to promptly release 24,000 cubic feet per second (cusecs) of water from its reservoirs. The objective was to secure the specified volume of water at Biligundlu on the interstate border for the remaining part of the current month. The request also included a plea for the Court to instruct Karnataka to guarantee the release of the designated 36.76 TMC (thousand million cubic feet) of water as outlined for September 2023 in accordance with the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (CWDT)'s final decision from February 2007, which was subsequently modified by the Supreme Court in 2018.

The Cauvery water dispute is a long standing dispute between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu and began in 1974 when Karnataka, the upper riparian State, started diverting water without Tamil Nadu's consent. The tussle reached Supreme Court after CWDT in 2007 finalised the water sharing formula. The award had come on February 5, 2007, and was gazetted by the Central government on February 19, 2013. Besides deciding on the sharing of water, the tribunal had recommended setting up a Cauvery Water Management Board and the Cauvery Water Regulation Committee.

In 2018, a three-judges bench of the then Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices Amitava Roy and AM Khanwilkar had directed the State of Karnataka to release 177.25 TMC of water, instead of the 192 TMC, to the State of Tamil Nadu.

Case Title: State Of Karnataka By Its Chief Secretary v. State Of Tamil Nadu State By Its Chief Secretary MA 3127/2018 in C.A. No. 2453/2007

Click Here To Read/Download Order