Issues pertaining to Peninsular Rivers wing

i. Interstate matters:

(a) Mullaperiyar Dam Issue

1. On 29‐10‐1886, a lease indenture for 999 years was made between Maharaja of Travancore and
Secretary of State for India for Periyar irrigation works. By another agreement in 1970, Tamil
Nadu was permitted to generate power also. The Mullaperiyar Dam was constructed during
1887‐1895. Its full reservoir level is 152 ft and it provides water through a tunnel to Vaigai basin
in Tamil Nadu for irrigation benefits in 68558 ha area.

2. In 1979, reports appeared in Kerala Press about damage to Periyar Dam. On 25th November,
1979 Chairman, CWC held meeting with the officers of Irrigation and Electricity, Deptt. of Kerala
and PWD of Tamil Nadu and some emergency medium term measures and long‐term measures
for strengthening of Periyar Dam were decided. A second meeting under the Chairmanship of
Chairman, CWC was held on 29th April 1980 and it was opined that after the completion of
emergency and medium term measures, the water level in the reservoir can be raised up to 145
ft.

3. The matter became sub‐judice with several petitions. On the directions of the Supreme Court in
its order dated 28.4.2000, Minister (WR) convened the Inter‐State meeting on 19.5.2000 and as
decided in the meeting, an Expert Committee under Member (D&R), CWC with representatives
from both States was constituted in June 2000 to study the safety of the dam. The Committee in
its report of March, 2001 opined that with the strengthening measures implemented, the water
level can be raised from 136 ft. To 142 ft. without endangering safety of the dam. Further raising
of water level to 152 ft. would be considered after balance strengthening measures are
implemented.

4. The Supreme Court in its orders on 27.2.2006, permitted the Government of Tamil Nadu to raise
the water level of MullaPeriyar dam from 136 ft. to 142 ft. and to carry out the remaining
strengthening measures. After that the Government of Kerala passed the Kerala Irrigation and
Water Conservation (Amendment) Act 2006 on 18th March 2006 which prohibited the raising of
water level beyond 136 ft. in the MullaPeriyar Dam and placed it in the Schedule of ‘Endangered
Dams’. Government of Tamil Nadu filed a suit in the Supreme Court on 31.3.2006 praying for
declaration of above Act as unconstitutional in its application to and effect on MullaPeriyar Dam
and restraining the State of Kerala from obstructing Tamil Nadu to increase the water level to
142 feet .

5. The Union Minister (WR) convened an inter‐State meeting of the Chief Ministers of States of
Tamil Nadu and Kerala on Mullaperiyar dam issue on 29.11.2006 at New Delhi. Both States
reiterated their respective stand in the meetings and no consensus could be reached regarding a
solution acceptable to both States.

1
6. Subsequently, Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu met Prime Minister on 18.12.2007 and Prime
Minister suggested him to have a meeting with Chief Minister of Kerala on MullaPeriyar issue.
Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu met Chief Minister of Kerala on 19.12.2007 in presence of Union
Minister of Water Resources. Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu vide letter dated 20.12.2007
mentioned that in the above meeting, he had suggested to oversee the seepage measurement
of the dam by engineers not belonging to either of the two States through CWC and Chief
Minister of Kerala agreed to consider this. However a consensus of both the states on such
monitoring mechanism could not be achieved

7. In the meanwhile, Govt. of Kerala carried out hydrological review studies through a professor of
IIT, Delhi and concluded in the report that the MullaPeriyar dam is hydrologically unsafe for
passing the estimated Probable Maximum Flood. CWC examined this report and observed that
the report does not appear to be well founded.

8. Secretary (WR) convened an interstate meeting on the MullaPeriyar Dam on 31.7.2009. In the
meeting the representative of Kerala informed that the Kerala Govt. visualizes construction of a
new dam as the only feasible solution. They could also consider the construction of a new dam
at their own cost. Later, Govt. of Tamil Nadu vide letter dated 14.9.2009 mentioned that there is
no need for construction of a new dam by the Kerala Government, as the existing dam after it is
strengthened, would function like a new dam.

9. The MullaPeriyar case being heard by a five member bench of Hon`ble Supreme court, who vide
order 18.2.2010 directed constitution of an Empowered Committee. The Hon’ble Court
observed :

“That apart from the legal and constitutional issues, inter alia the real grievance that
concerns the state is Tamil Nadu is of not being able to increase the reservoir level of
MullaPeriyar Dam to 142 feet. The concern of the State of Kerala, on the other hand,
appears to be relating to the safety of the Dam.”

10. As per the said order, the terms of reference of the Empowered Committee were to :
(i) Hear parties to the suit on all issues that will be raised before them, without being
limited to the issues that have been raised before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and
furnish a report, as far as possible, within six months from their constitution.
(ii) The Committee shall frame its own procedure and issue appropriate directions as to the
hearings as well as venue of its sittings.
(iii) The Committee is free to receive such further evidence as it considers appropriate.
(iv) Legal and constitutional issues including the validity of the Kerala Irrigation and Water
Conservation (Amendment) Act, 2006 would be considered by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court of India.

11. Accordingly, the Ministry of Water Resources, vide Gazette Notification issued on 30.4.2010
constituted the Empowered Committee as under :

2
 Justice (Dr.) A.S. Anand ‐ Chairman
Justice Shri K.T. Thomas ‐ Member
Justice (Dr.) A.R. Lakshmanan ‐ Member
Dr. C.D. Thatte ‐ Member
Shri D.K. Mehta ‐ Member
Shri Sat Pal ‐ Member Secretary

12. The Committee held twenty meetings and also visited the site in December, 2010. In its report
submitted on 23.4.2012, the Committee concluded that dam is hydrologically safe and that
the proposal of State of Kerala to build a new dam requires reconsideration by State of Kerala.

13. The Empowered Committee in its report suggested two alternatives :

i. First alternative‐Kerala could construct a new Dam and the existing dam may not be
dismantled, demolished or decommissionedtill the new dam construction iscompleted
and it becomes operational.
ii. Second alternative‐ to repair, strengthen/ restore the existing dam.

14 A Constitution Bench, consisting of 5 Judges of Hon’ble Supreme Court, has heard the
MullaPeriyar Dam Case in July‐August, 2013.

Additional Solicitor General (Shri Mohan Jain) on 30.7.2013 had desired a specific
response/stand of the Government on the two alternatives suggested by the Empowered
Committee. While one alternative of the Committee was supporting Government of Tamil
Nadu, the other was supporting Government of Kerala.

The Ministry of Water Resources, with the approval of the Hon’ble Minister (WR)
conveyed to the Additional Solicitor General (Shri Mohan Jain) on 31.7.2013 that the
Ministry holds the Hon’ble Supreme Court in highest esteem and shall abide by the decision
of the Hon’ble Court.

15. Arguments in the case were completed on 21.8.2013.

16. A 5‐Judges Constitution Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court delivered its judgment regarding the
MullaPeriyar Dam on 7th May, 2014 in the Original Suit No. 3 of 2006 and declared that
“…………the Kerala Irrigation and Water Conservation (amendment) Act, 2006 passed by the
Kerala legislature is unconstitutional in its application to and effect on the Mullaperiyar dam.
The 1st defendant – State of Kerala – is restrained by a decree of permanent injunction from
applying and enforcing the impugned legislation or in any manner interfering with or
obstructing the State of Tamil Nadu from increasing the water level to 142 ft. and from
carrying out the repair works as per the judgement of this Court dated 27.2.2006 in W.P.(C)
No.386/2001 with connected matters.”

17. The Hon’ble Supreme Court inter alia directed for constitution of a 3‐Member Supervisory
Committee on Mullaperiyar Dam about the safety of the dam on restoration of Full Reservoir
Level (FRL) to 142 ft.

3
18. In pursuance to order/judgement dated 7.5.2014 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and as per
Cabinet approval dated 18.06.2014, a 3‐Member Supervisory Committee on Mullaperiyar Dam
has been constituted on 1.7.2014. Six meetings of Supervisory Committee on Mullaperiyar
Dam have been held on 8.7.2014, 17.7.2014, 19.8.2014, 15.9.2014, 3.11.2014 and 24.11.2014
in Kerala.

GIST OF ACTIVITIES/DECISIONS IN FIVE MEETINGS OF THE SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE ON

MULLAPERIYAR DAM:

1. First Meeting: It was decided that the office of the committee shall be provided by
Government of Kerala at Kumili.

2. Second Meeting: Meeting held at Thekkady. it was decided to restore FRL to +142.00 ft
level as per the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court; periodical inspection of the Dam
during pre‐monsoon and during monsoon; and to constitute a sub‐committee for
Monsoon (2014). Also, Tamil Nadu was directed to share all data observed from Dam
viz water level, storage, etc. and prepare schedule for operation of gates for
maintaining the water level at 142 ft.

3. Third Meeting: Sub‐committee started functioning from 1st September, 2014 and
expenditure/TA/DA etc. in respect of Sub‐Committee members would be borne by
respective departments.

4. Fourth Meeting: Concern shown for non‐cooperation of Kerala Forest department on

project activities and detailed deliberations took place over recommended
strengthening measures for the structural safety of the dam.

5. Fifth Meeting: To clear bottleneck regarding Power supply to Mullaperiyar Dam from
Kerala grid the Committee accepted the suggestion of Additional Chief Secretary,
Kerala and decided that Tamil Nadu officials could meet Kerala State Electricity Board.
The repair work for Gate No. 13 in progress with replacement of spare parts. Kerala
stressed to regulate reservoir level to 136 ft to avoid risk to people downstream.
However, TN emphasized the balance 12 gates to discharge flood and the present
position is entirely under control.

6. Sixth Meeting: The main agenda for this meeting was the security aspects of the
Mullaperiyar Dam in the light of the incident took place on 17th November at the dam
site when the local MLA barged in with a group of journalists without a permit and in
the melee the Executive Engineer was nearly assaulted physically.

19. The State Government of Kerala filed Review petition (C) No. 1705 of 2014 in Original Suit
No.3 of 2006, i.e. against the Hon’ble Supreme Court order dated 7.5.2014 which has been
dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 2nd December, 2014.

20. The water level in Mullaperiyar dam started rising gradually during south‐west and North‐
East monsoon, 2014 and reached up to 142 ft level on 22nd November,2014, as allowed by
Hon’ble Supreme Court. Thereafter the water level started falling gradually.

21. The Committee has noted that there is no visible sign of distress in the dam and the seepage
through the body of dam is within limits and permissible for a safe dam.

4
(b) Vansdhara River Water Issue :

1. Vansadhara river is an important East‐flowing river originating just South‐West

of Lanjigarh Village, Kalahandi District, Odisha. The river flows for a total length of about 265
Kms out of which, 154 Kms lies in Odisha, whereas remaining 82 Kms lies in Andhra
Pradesh before it falls into the Bay of Bengal. Approximately 29
Kms length of the river forms the common boundary between Odisha and Andhra
Pradesh. No portion of river lies in Telengana. The Vansadhara
River basin has a catchment area of 10830 Sq. Kms of which 8960 Sq Kms (82.7%) lies in
Odisha and the remaining 1870 Sq. Kms (17.3%) lies in Andhra Pradesh. Odisha is the upper
riparian State while Andhra Pradesh is the lower riparian State. State Government
of Andhra Pradesh, as part of development of Vansadhara Basin
, proposed construction of Gotta barrage and Neradi barrage across river Vansadhara in
the 1950s. The construction of the aforesaid
Gotta barrage was completed sometime in the year 1982. Neradi barrage
is proposed 48 Kms. upstream of Gotta barrage and involved submergence of large area
and hence consultation between the two States were
required. Consequent upon mutual discussion the Governments of Odisha and Andhra
Pradeshagreed on 30.9.1962 to share the water of Vansadhara river and its valley. The
yield of Vansadhara basin estimated at Gotta barrage of 115 Thousand Million Cubic feet
(TMC) is just
sufficient to meet the requirements of both the States. The water of Vansadhara basin
consequently is to be utilized by both Andhra Pradesh and Odisha on 50 : 50 basis.

2. The dispute is regarding construction of the Neradi barrage. Although at one stage it
was mutually agreed upon but later the State of Odisha opposed it
on various grounds. As there was an objection to the construction of Neradi barrage, the
State of Andhra Pradesh proposed construction of a side weir on its side of the river as
temporary measure to utilize some of the river water before it falls into the sea. In 1980,
unprecedented floods occurred in the basin and the State Government of Odisha wanted
Andhra Pradesh to modify the design of the Neradi barrage. In 1985 during meeting
between the officers of the two State Governments, the design flood was agreed to for a
peak flood of 6 lakh cusecs. In order to confine the land acquisition to 106 acres in Odisha,
Government of Andhra Pradesh proposed in 1987 construction of flood protection wall of
3.5 Kms upstream of the barrage on the Odisha side. Proposal was discussed in the
meeting convened by Central Water Commission (CWC) where engineers of both the States
participated and the proposal regarding afflux was agreed to. The State of Odisha, despite
the agreement, expressed reservations and took a stand that mathematical model studies
be conducted. Accordingly, Government of Andhra Pradesh got the mathematical studies
done through CWC. In 2001, in a meeting between the Chief Minister of Odisha and
Irrigation Minister of Andhra Pradesh, the Government of Odisha officers pointed out that
mathematical model is not enough and physical model studies need to be conducted. It
was agreed to that Central Water and Power Research Station (CWPRS), Pune may be
associated with the conduct of the studies. Government of Andhra Pradesh engaged
CWPRS for conducting the physical model studies for Neradi Barrage as well as for the
construction of the side weir. The studies concluded that there would be no morphological
changes as suggested by the State Government of Odisha.

3. In view of the inordinate delay in construction of the aforesaid Neradi barrage,

proposed about 5 decades back, the State of Andhra Pradesh suggested the constructi
on of a Side Weir with a link canal of about 2 ½ Kms.

5
 on its side of the river as a temporary measure to enable the State of Andhra Pradesh
to draw about 8 TMC of water to meet its immediate irrigation requirement at 2 Kms
upstream of the proposed Neradi barrage. The State Government of Odisha opposed this
proposal of the State of Andhra Pradesh contending that the construction would adversely
affect supply of drinking water to 18 villages, deprive the existing and possible irrigation
project of 30000 acres, cause irreparable damage to environment, flora, fauna and river
morphology, degradation and aggradations with possible shift of river towards the right
bank which falls within the territory of Andhra Pradesh. Despite the stiff opposition by the
Government of Odisha, the State Government of Andhra Pradesh started mobilizing
resources with the intention of taking up construction of the side weir.

4. Consequently, the State Government of Odisha filed a complaint under Section 3 of the
Inter‐State River Water Disputes Act, 1956 with the Ministry of Water Resources,
Government of India on 14.02.2006 requesting constitution of Inter‐State Water Disputes
Tribunal.
5. On receipt of aforesaid complaint, a series of High Level Officers’ Meetings were convened
by the Ministry of Water Resources to settle the dispute through negotiations. However, the
issue was not resolved.

6. In the meanwhile, State Government of Odisha filed a writ petition (Civil) No. 443 of 2006
under Article 32 of the Constitution of India before the Supreme Court of India with the
prayer for directing the Central Government to constitute a Tribunal in terms of Inter‐State
Water Disputes Act and to refer all the water disputes in respect of the Inter‐State River
Vansadhara to it for adjudication.

7. In its judgement of 6.2.2009, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India directed the Central
Government to constitute a Water Dispute Tribunal, in pursuance of which the Ministry of
Water Resources constituted the Vansadhara Water Disputes Tribunal (VWDT), which was
notified in the Official Gazette on 20.2.2010.

8. Hon’ble Tribunal delivered its judgement in the I.A. No. 1 of 2010 on 17th December, 2013,
allowing the Government of Andhra Pradesh to construct the Side Channel Weir along with
the ancillary works as proposed and has, inter alia, directed for constitution of a 3‐Member
Supervisory Flow Management and Regulation Committee on River Vansadhara.

9. The order of the Hon’ble Tribunal of 17th December, 2013 in I.A.No.1 of 2010 para 54 further
reads as under:

“…It is also made clear that this order granting permission to construct the Side Weir with its
ancillary work and condition laid herein are all temporary in nature and could be varied by
the Tribunal as and when there is appropriate cause and reason for it”.

10. A cabinet Note is prepared wherein a three (3) member Protem Supervisory Flow
Management and Regulation Committee on River Vansadhara is proposed to be constituted
with one representative each from the Central Water Commission, State of Odisha and
Andhra Pradesh. The representative of Central Water Commission shall be Chairman of the
Committee. The Protem Supervisory Flow Management and Regulation Committee shall
supervise the construction as also functioning of the Side Weir and ensure implementation
of the order of the Tribunal as contained in Hon’ble Tribunal’s judgement dated 17.12.2013.
However, this Cabinet Note is kept on hold as the Odisha Government has files a SLP no.
3392/2014 in the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and thus the matter has become subjudice.

6
(c) Cauvery River Water Sharing Issue

Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (CWDT) submitted its final report and decision on 05.02.2007. In
compliance to the Supreme Court decision of 4th February, 2013 in IA No. 5 of 2013 in the Civil
Appeal No. 2456 of 2007, filed by State Government of Tamil Nadu, the Ministry has published the
Final Order and Decision of CWDT dated 5th February, 2007 in the Gazette of India on 19.02.2013.

An I.A. No. 5 of 2013 was filed in the Hon’ble Supreme Court by the Government of Tamil Nadu
praying for a direction against the Union of India to constitute Cauvery Management Board as per
the directions contained in the Final Order/Award dated 05.02.2007. In this regard, an Affidavit
dated 01.05.2013 was filed on behalf of Ministry of Water Resources (MoWR) clearly stating that
after publication of the decision of CWDT on 19.02.2013, the Ministry of Water Resources has
initiated action for constitution of Cauvery Management Board in consultation with concerned
Ministries.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court, during the hearing of this I.A. on 10.05.2013 directed to constitute a
Supervisory Committee to implement Final Order dated 05.02.2007 of CWDT, as a purely pro tem
measure until Cauvery Management Board is constituted. In pursuance, MoWR published the
Gazette Notification for constitution of Supervisory Committee comprising Secretary, Ministry of
Water Resources, New Delhi as Chairman, Chief Secretaries of concerned States & Union Territory of
Puducherry and Chairman, Central Water Commission (CWC), New Delhi as Member and Chief
Engineer, CWC, New Delhi as Member‐Secretary. Four meetings of this committee have already
been held at New Delhi on 01.06.2013, 12.06.2013, 15.07.2013 and 08.11.2013.

After Gazette Notification of Final Order of CWDT, advice of the Ministry of Law & Justice was sought
on whether Central Government may constitute the Cauvery Management Board for the purpose of
securing compliance and implementation of the final decision and directions of CWDT as per the
provision u/s 6A(1) of the Act. On this issue, the Ministry of Law & Justice advised that “....the order
dated 10.05.2013 does not restrict the concerned Administrative Ministry from performing its
mandate under the Inter State Water Disputes Act and to give effect to the award of the Tribunal
which was published on 19.02.2013 though any such steps would be subject to the outcome of the
pending civil appeals.”

Governments of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu have taken different stands on constitution of Cauvery
Management Board. Therefore matter needs to be examined meticulously before any decision can be
taken in this regard.

Further, the State Governments of Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu filed Civil Appeal No.(s) 2453 of
2007, 2454 of 2007 and 2456 of 2007, and related IAs, respectively in this regard which are pending
before by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. Thus the matter is quite sensitive and sub‐judice.

(d) Krishna Water Issue

The Krishna river issues involve the States of Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. The
Central Government set up Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal (referred to as KWDT‐II) vide
notification dated 2nd April, 2004. KWDT‐II after examining the submissions made by the States viz.
Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh gave its report on 30th December, 2010.

Immediately after submission of the report by the Tribunal on 30th December, 2010, the State of
Andhra Pradesh filed an SLP (Civil) No. 10498/2011 in March, 2011 before the Hon’ble Supreme
Court as well as, along with the States of Maharashtra and Karnataka, submitted their references

7
before KWDT – II under Section 5 (3) of ISRWD Act, 1956. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide its order
dated 16th September, 2011, directed that till further orders, the decisions which may be taken by
the Tribunal on the reference petitions filed by the three States and the Central Government shall
not be published in the official Gazette in terms of Section 6 (1) of the Act.

The references submitted before KWDT – II by States of Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra
Pradesh under Section 5 (3) of ISRWD Act, 1956 were examined by KWDT –II and the further report
has been submitted on 29th November, 2013.

On 16th January, 2014, the State of Andhra Pradesh has filed another SLP (Civil) No. 3076‐3079 of
2014 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court against the impugned Further Report/Order dated
29.11.2013 passed by the KWDT‐II. A Counter‐Affidavit has been filed in the Supreme Court on 1st
September 2014 on behalf of Union Government stating that as per Section 11 of ISRWD Act, SLP is
not maintainable. In this petition, Government of Maharashtra has now filed an I.A. No.5‐8 of 2014
praying to the Hon’ble Supreme Court to direct the Government of India to notify the decision of the
KWDT of 30th December, 2010 and the further report of 29th November, 2013 by the Tribunal under
references made under Section 5(3). Its reply is already given in the above Affidavit. The matter of
KWDT‐II is sub‐judice before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

As per the provision of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act 2014, the term of the Krishna Water
Disputes Tribunal‐II has been extended for two years w.e.f. 1st August 2014 vide Gazette Notification
dated 15th May, 2014 for making project‐wise specific allocation, if such allocation have not been
made by a Tribunal and determine an operational protocol for project‐wise release of water in the
event of deficit flows in terms of Section 89 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014.

(e) Babhali Barrage Issue

Babhali barrage is located on the main Godavari River in Nanded district; 7.0 km upstream of
Maharashtra – Andhra Pradesh border. The Pochampad dam on Godavari River is 81 km
downstream of Babhali barrage. Pochampad storage stretches to a distance of 32 km within
Maharashtra territory and its submergence is contained within river banks in its territory under
static conditions. The then State of Andhra Pradesh in May, 2005 brought to the notice of the
Central Government that Government of Maharashtra was constructing Babhali barrage in the
submergence area of Pochampad (Shriram Sagar) Project in violation of the Godavari Water Dispute
Tribunal (GWDT) award dated 07.07.1980. In July 2006, the Government of Andhra Pradesh also
filed an Original Suit No. 1 of 2006, State of Andhra Pradesh v/s State of Maharashtra & Ors in the
Supreme Court.

Hon’ble Supreme Court on 28th February 2013 delivered its judgment in the Original Suit No. 1 of
2006, State of Andhra Pradesh vs State of Maharashtra & Others and inter‐alia directed for
constitution of a three member Supervisory Committee having one representative from the Central
Water Commission and one representative each from the two states, Andhra Pradesh and
Maharashtra. In compliance to the Hon’ble Supreme Court Judgement, a three member Supervisory
Committee was constituted on 24th October 2013.

Subsequent to the enactment of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014 a Clarificatory
Application before the Hon’ble Apex court seeking direction/clarification to substitute the
representative of Andhra Pradesh by the representatives of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh and/or
appropriate directions has been filed as per the advice of Ministry of Law & Justice. The matter is yet

8
to be taken up by the Hon’ble Apex Court. The matter between the two states continues to be
contentious.

(f) Issues related to Krishna and Godavari waters amongst the states of Telangana and A.P.

Government has constituted vide Gazette Notification dated 28th May, 2014 Krishna River
Management Board and Godavari River Management Board as per the Andhra Pradesh
Reorganisation Act, 2014 (6 of 2014) for administration, regulation, maintenance and operation of
such projects as may be notified by the Central Government. An Apex Council comprising the
Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India as Chairperson and Chief Ministers of the States
of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana as Members supervises the functioning of the Godavari and
Krishna River Management Boards, planning and approval of proposals for construction of new
projects, if any and resolution of any dispute amicably arising out of the sharing of the river waters
through negotiation and mutual agreement. The functions of each Board include regulation of
supply of water from the projects to the successor States having regard to awards granted by the
Tribunals constituted under the Inter‐State River Water Disputes Act, 1956.

Notably, the then State of Andhra Pradesh filed an SLP in March, 2011 before the Hon’ble Supreme
Court regarding award of Krishna River Water Dispute Tribunal (KWDT‐II). The Hon’ble Supreme
Court, vide its order dated 16th September,2011 directed that till further orders, the decisions which
may be taken by the Tribunal on the reference petitions filed by the three States and the Central
Government shall not be published in the official Gazette in terms of Section 6(1) of the Act. The
matter of KWDT‐II is sub‐judice before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Also, the term of the KWDT‐II has
been extended for another two years w.e.f. 01.08.2014 for issues related to share of water of
Telangana and A.P.

Further, the matter related to water uses of Krishna and Godavari rivers continue to remain
contentious amongst the two states. Many news items have appeared recently indicating violence
and unrest in two states on the issue of water sharing and usage by the two states.

(g) Issue of Power Generation from Srisailam Project

Government of Andhra Pradesh (GoAP) on 21.10.2014 requested the intervention of Krishna River
Management Board (KRMB) on the drawl of water by Government of Telangana for power
generation from Srisailam Left Bank Power House so that the drinking water and irrigation water
requirements are not compromised. KRMB suggested that till such times the operating procedures
are modified/updated the existing Government Orders (G.O. Ms No. 59, dated 15.01.1996 and G.O.
Ms. No. 107, dated 28.09.2004) for any release shall continue to be honoured in letter and spirit.
Telangana however stated that the release for power generation is required to save the crop by
pumping water. In this light, second meeting of KRMB was held on 30.10.2014 at Hyderabad to
discuss inter‐alia the issue of power generation from Srisailam Reservoir.

An order was issued on 31.10.2014 in which it was directed that up to 2.11.2014, the water in
Srisailam may be used optimally in such a way that drawl of water for power generation may not
exceed 3 TMC up to 2.11.2014 after which the demand for power may go down. Order also
mentioned that if required the matter will be reviewed after 15.11.2014.

Aggrieved by above Order dated 31.10.2014 of KRMB, Shri T. Harish Rao, Minister for Irrigation
complained on 3.11.2014 to Hon’ble Minister (WR, RD&GR) and requested to stay the operation of

9
the order of KRMB immediately pending detailed review and finalization of the issue. Shri Rao
complained that the Chairman exceeded his jurisdiction and passed a unilateral order without
reference to the entitlement/allocation to both the States by Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal
(KWDT‐I) and the agreement entered into by the erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh. He also
mentioned that by 3.11.2014, 63.14 TMC of water has been drawn by GoAP against the entitlement
of 34 TMC as per KWDT‐I Award.

With the above complaint, Shri T. Harish Rao had a meeting with Hon’ble Minister (WR, RD&GR) on
3.11.2014 at New Delhi. In the meeting, it was clarified to him that KRMB has not issued any
direction to stop power generation from Srisailam Left Bank Power House after 2.11.2014 as
interpreted by GoT. The detailed views of KRMB on this complaint have recently been received in
the Ministry which also inter‐alia reiterates that the Order dated 31.10.2014 nowhere mentions
regarding stoppage of power.

(h) Release of Water from Neyyar Dam by Government of Kerala

Vide this Ministry’s O.M. No. Secy. (WR)/Misc./2014 dated 5th June, 2014, it was intimated that the
Neyyar Irrigation Project (both first and second stages) was planned and executed by the State of Kerala.
Due to the States’ Reorganization in 1956, a portion of the ayacut localized to be served by this project
to an extent of 9200 acres lying in the Vilavancode taluk got transferred to Madras State (Tamil Nadu)
and forms part of Kanyakumari District. The canal works required to feed this ayacut were executed by
the State of Tamil Nadu at their own cost with the approval of the Central Government and the
Government of Kerala. The project is in operation from the year 1965.

Kerala has taken a stand “since Neyyar is not an Inter‐State river, it would not be necessary to conclude
an inter‐State agreement regarding the sharing of waters to this river”. Tamil Nadu has established from
the topo sheets that the head catchment area of about 12.90 sq.km of river Neyyar is within the Tamil
Nadu area. The issue was under examination in the Central Water Commission (CWC). However, both
the States of Tamil Nadu and Kerala have not responded to the letters of CWC since 2011 and
meanwhile, State of Tamil Nadu filed an Original Suit No. 2 of 2012 before Hon’ble Supreme Court of
India on the above issue. The matter is now sub‐judice.

(i) Project being executed by Kerala across River Pambar in Cauvery Basin

The Government of Tamil Nadu has complained on 13.11.2014 to the Central Government that the
Government of Kerala is planning to construct a dam with storage capacity of about 2 TMC of water
across river Pambar at Pattissery in Kerala at an estimated cost of Rs.26 crore. He has also
mentioned that the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu on 8.11.2014 had urged the Hon’ble Prime Minister
to advise the Government of Kerala not to proceed with the projects in river Pambar without the
consent of Tamil Nadu and the approval of the Cauvery Management Board. River Pambar
originating in Kerala is a tributary of river Amaravathi which is a tributary of river Cauvery. River
Amaravathi is formed after confluence in the State of Tamil Nadu of rivers Pambar and Vattavada
both originating in the State of Kerala.

The Government of Tamil Nadu has requested the Central Government to advise the Government of
Kerala not to proceed with the proposed construction of the dam in Pambar sub‐basin and also
furnish full information of all the projects the Government of Kerala has taken up or proposed to be
taken up in Amaravathi Basin and also not to execute any scheme without the prior approval of the
Cauvery Management Board and the consent of the Government of Tamil Nadu.

10
The matter was forwarded to Central Water Commission for their comments/ observations on the
issue vide letter dated 20th November, 2014. Central Water Commission has informed that they have
not received any project report on the said project for examination from inter‐state angle. PMO has
duly been informed about this in response to several references received from them.

Meanwhile Government of Kerala has reported that they are taking up the Pattissery Project, which
is included in the Chengalar Scheme as per the Clause XVIII of the Order of CWDT. There is no need
to take any permission from any one. The Award has allotted 3 TMC to Kerala in Pambar basin which
includes 0.80 TMC for the Chengalar project. They are taking up the Pattissery Dam Project which is
one of the dams included in the Chengalar Scheme.

(j) Construction of New Dams across Cauvery at Mekedatu

1 References from Chief Minister, Tamil Nadu

1.1 A reference dated 02.09.2013 from Chief Minister, Tamil Nadu through Prime Minister’s
Office was received in the Ministry of Water Resources in regard to proposal of the Government of
Karnataka to construct a hydropower station at Mekedatu in Karnataka. In the Letter, Chief Minister,
Tamil Nadu had stated that the media had widely reported the statement of the Minister for Law,
Government of Karnataka about the Government of Karnataka’s plan to construct a hydropower
station at Mekedatu and for this purpose, three reservoirs are planned to be constructed across the
river Cauvery near Mekedatu. She had, therefore, requested the Prime Minister to advise the
Government of Karnataka not to take up any schemes including hydro‐electric projects in the
Cauvery Basin of Karnataka without the prior consent of the Government of Tamil Nadu.

In response, Hon’ble Minister (WR) had addressed to Chief Minister, Tamil Nadu on 18th November,
2013 wherein it was mentioned that a Detailed Project Report (DPR) on Shivasamudram Run of the
River Power (SRRP) Project in Cauvery Basin of Karnataka State was received in Central Water
Commission (CWC) in April 2012 from Karnataka for examination from inter‐State angle. Since
neither any agreement among co‐basin States under intimation to the Cauvery Water Disputes
Tribunal (CWDT) nor prior consent of CWDT was attached with the DPR, the project could not be
considered for clearance from inter‐State angle. Thereafter no DPR of SRRP Project or a hydro‐
electric project at Mekedatu has been received in CWC for techno‐economic examination/clearance.
DPRs of hydro‐electric project at Shivasamudram or Mekedatu as and when received will be
examined as per Clause‐XIII of Final Order dated 5.2.2007 of CWDT. PMO was also informed on this
issue.

1.2 Another reference dated 12.11.2014 of Chief Minister, Tamil Nadu through Prime Minister’s
Office was received in the Ministry of Water Resources in which it was mentioned that the
Government of Karnataka has invited Global Expression of Interest for Technical Feasibility Study to
construct two reservoirs at Mekedatu across river Cauvery. The Government of Tamil Nadu
requested the State not to execute any such scheme without the prior approval of the Cauvery
Management Board and the consent of the Government of Tamil Nadu. The Ministry’s reply on this
issue was forwarded to PMO.

2 Recent Reference

Recently on 3rd December, 2014, Shri Pon. Radhakrishnan, Hon’ble Minister of State for Road
Transport, Highways and Shipping enclosed a representation dated 1.11.2014 from Shri M.
Muruganantham regarding the proposed move of Karnataka Government to construct a dam across

11
river Cauvery. Hon’ble Minister has requested to take urgent steps to direct the Karnataka
Government to refrain from the same. Hon’ble Minister (WRRDGR) has already addressed to him on
19th January, 2015 on this issue.

3 Parliament Question on similar Subject

In a related Parliament Question (Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 3046 on “Dams in Karnataka”
asked by Shri C. Rajendran to be answered on 29.08.2013), the Ministry’s answer was as follows.

“Water is a subject in the State List at Entry 17 of List II in 7th Schedule of the Constitution. The
development of irrigation thus falls in the ambit of respective State.Governments and as such the
planning, execution, operation and maintenance of irrigation projects are to be carried out by the
States from their own resources as per their priorities. States are required to share the detailed
project report of major and medium irrigation projects situated on inter‐ State rivers for concurrence
of the basin States. State Governments are also supposed to implement these projects based on
inter‐State agreements, orders of Hon’ble Supreme Courts/High Courts, awards of Tribunals,
whichever may be applicable. Ministry of Water Resources examines the projects from inter‐State
aspect before clearing it from techo‐economic consideration”.

4 Concluding Remarks

As per constitutional provision, the development of water resources is in the ambit of respective
State Governments. The Tribunal in its order dated 05.02.2007 has intended not to impair the right
or power or authority of any State to regulate its water resources within its boundaries. Only two
conditions have been imposed on the upper riparian States. First, the pattern of downstream
releases should be consistent with the order and second, the annual allocation amongst the party
States could not be changed.

It is worth mentioning that the guidance/clarifications of the Tribunal on the Final Order dated
05.02.2007 under Section 5(3) of ISRWD Act, 1956 is yet to be made available. The SLPs filed by party
States are under consideration of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. However, Hon’ble Supreme Court has
not put any restriction on implementation of the Award. Rather, the Award has been published in
the Official Gazette on 19.02.2013 and implementation mechanism in the form of pro tem
Supervisory Committee has also been put in place on 22.05.2013 both by the orders of Hon’ble
Supreme Court dated 04.02.2013 and 10.05.2013 respectively. In this backdrop, any decision/action
taken on the issue is always subject to the outcome of these two pending references in the Hon’ble
Supreme Court and the Tribunal till their final disposal.

(k) Execution of diversion structures across Inter‐State river Pennaiyar by Government of

Karnataka

Principal Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu vide D.O. letter dated 7.12.2014 has complained
that the Government of Tamil Nadu has noticed that certain works are being undertaken by
Karnataka State Water Supply and Sanitary Board, Bangalore to construct an anicut with a capacity
of about 500 m. cu. f. across Markandey Nadi, a tributary of river Pennaiyar to supply drinking water
to various towns. According to Tamil Nadu, it will be tantamount to breach Madras‐Mysore
agreement of 1892. He has requested Government of India to intervene in the matter and advise the

12
Government of Karnataka not to venture any scheme in the Inter‐state river Pennaiyar withhold
consultation and obtaining prior consent of Government of Tamil Nadu.

The matter was forwarded to Central Water Commission for their comments/ observations on the
issue vide letter dated 20th October, 2014. They have replied that no such DPR has been received
for examination from inter‐State angle.

In a similar reference earlier, the Chief Minister, Tamil Nadu on 27.3.2013 had sought the
intervention of the Hon’ble Prime Minister and to advise the Government of Karnataka to stop
forthwith the execution of any diversion structure across river Pennaiyar. Based on the inputs
provided by Cauvery & Southern Rivers Organization (CSRO), Central Water Commission (CWC),
Coimbatore, Hon’ble Minister (WR) addressed to Chief Minister on 30.9.2013 that there appears no
apparent breach of Madras‐Mysore Agreement of 1892.

(l) Repairs of Shenbagavalli Anicut and Kannaimathagu channel situated in Kerala near the
Kerala – Tamil Nadu border

Government of Tamil Nadu has requested the Ministry of Water Resources to advise the
Government of Kerala to cooperate for carrying out the repair works to Shenbagavalli Anicut in
Kerala territory near Kerala ‐ Tamil Nadu border on humanitarian approach. The Shenbagavalli
Anicut is a small diversion anicut built in Kerala State limits which diverts flows through a channel
(Kannaimathagu channel) to feed tanks and Sivgiri taluk in Thirunelvei district in Tamil Nadu. The
repairs to this anicut were carried out during the years 1959 to 1962 by the Government of Tamil
Nadu with the concurrence of the Government of Kerala. Subsequent to this, further efforts by the
Government of Tamil Nadu to carry out the repair of anicut and channel could not be materialized
due to non‐cooperation of Government of Kerala.

Earlier in April 1998, field office of CWC at Coimbatore had taken up certain inter‐state issues
referred by the Government of Tamil Nadu to the Government of Kerala, repairs of Shenbagavalli
Anicut and Kannaimathagu channel was one of them. However, Government of Kerala considered
the repair issue purely as an inter‐state affair between Kerala and Tamil Nadu and did not find any
necessity to have a central machinery to sort out the inter‐state river issue as proposed. They have
practically refused any repairs to these structures. The issue remains unresolved.

References keep on coming from Government of Tamil Nadu requesting the Ministry to resolve the
issue. As a last ditch effort, Chief Engineer, CWC, Coimbatore has recently been requested to
mediate between Kerala and Tamil Nadu so as to arrive at an amicable solution to the problem.
Chief Engineer, CWC has requested Government of Tamil Nadu to come forward with all the details
on the issue, but they have not responded to any of his requests. The issue remains unresolved.

(m) Palar River Issue

The river Palar originates in the State of Karnataka in Kolar district. It travels through Andhra
Pradesh and then enters Tamil Nadu and finally joins the Bay of Bengal, south of Mahabalipuram.

Secretary (WR), Government of Tamil Nadu addressed a letter dated 1.02.2006 to the Secretary
(WR), Government of India regarding reports on the construction of a reservoir by the Government
of Andhra Pradesh across the river Palar near Kuppam. It was mentioned in the letter that the
Government of Andhra Pradesh has initiated proposals and are about to start the work on a
reservoir across river Palar near Kuppam in Chittoor district of Andhra Pradesh. It was also

13
mentioned that river Palar is a lifeline of the people living in Vellore and Kancheepuram district of
Tamil Nadu and the construction of the project by the State of Andhra Pradesh would seriously
affect the drinking water requirement in the aforesaid district. It was further mentioned that the
Hon’ble Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu had already written a letter to Hon’ble Chief Minister of
Andhra Pradesh on 5th January, 2006 for seeking details of the scheme and requesting to stop any
construction. It was requested in the letter that Government of India may take immediate action in
this matter and restrain the Government of Andhra Pradesh from any further action in the matter.

The comments in the matter were sought from Government of Andhra Pradesh. Government of
Andhra Pradesh vide letter dated 14.2.2006 informed that Hon’ble Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh
has already informed Hon’ble Chief Minister Tamil Nadu on 2.2.2006 that while finalising the design
and other parameters of the irrigation schemes, the concerns of all the riparian States will certainly
be taken into consideration. The Government of Tamil Nadu was apprised about the same.

Subsequently, Secretary (PWD), Government of Tamil Nadu vide letter dated 9.5.2007 requested this
Ministry to prevail upon the Government of Andhra Pradesh not to take up the proposed
construction of this project. The comments of the Government of Andhra Pradesh were sought in
this regard. Meanwhile, Secretary (PWD), Government of Tamil Nadu informed vide letter dated
5.7.07 informed that they have filed an O.S No.2 of 2006 in the Hon’ble Supreme Court on the issue.
In view of this, the Government of Tamil Nadu was informed vide MoWR letter dated 14.8.2007 and
6.11.2007 that it may not be appropriate for this Ministry to intervene in the matter at this stage.

However, in the hearing dated 7.1.2008, Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that Union of India would
be at liberty to settle the disputes between the two States. In view of this, Central Water
Commission (CWC) convened two inter‐State meetings on 11.3.2008 and 26.8.2008 and it was
decided that CWC will carry out studies jointly with the States to arrive at water availability at
various points in basin. A Joint Study Group was constituted in this regard and the Group held 4
meetings on 24.06.2009, 27.8.2009, 14/15‐12‐2009 and 6/7th April, 2010.

The Group has submitted its report. Another Interstate meeting was convened by CWC on
24.12.2010 and after deliberations it transpired in the meeting that Tamil Nadu was not in favour of
giving consent for the proposed project of Andhra Pradesh at this stage. However, CWC stated that it
shall be willing to facilitate if the states of Andhra Pradesh & Tamil Nadu approach it with intension
to settle the issue.

In accordance with the direction of the Supreme Court of India in the matter of O.S No.2 of 2006, the
Secretary (WR) convened a meeting with the Chief Secretary, Tamil Nadu, Principal Secretary
(Irrigation), Andhra Pradesh and Chairman, CWC on 26.05.2011at MOWR to discuss the Palar River
Water issue. However, in view of the rigid stand taken by the party States, no amicable solution
could be evolved.

The matter is now before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the court has started hearing the matter,
as is evident from the Hon’ble court’s order dated 3.1.2013 reproduced below:

“Both sides agree that the evidence can be commenced on 12.02.2013. Hence, examination of PW‐1
is scheduled on 12.02.2013 at 2.30 PM in Registrar Court No.1. It will be continued on 13th and 14th
February, 2013. Hence, adjourned to 12.02.2013 for examination of PW‐1”.

14