KAVERI RIVER :

A Dispute Between
Two States
BRIEFING
The sharing of waters of the Kaveri River has
been an apple of discord between the Indian
states of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. The
genesis of this conflict rest in to agreement in
1892 and 1924 between the erstwhile Madras
presidency and princely state of Mysore.
The Kaveri River has been a source of conflict
between the states for over 124 years.
 INTRODUCTION
The primary quarrel, in this case, has always
been about the sharing and distribution of
water of Kaveri River between two states.
Over the years, repeated attempts from both
the states and central governments have
failed to resolve this dispute which has now
transformed into regional conflict. The Kaveri
River dispute has become a very sensitive
topic for common people of both the states
who now regard treat it as a fight for
regional supremacy between the two states.
ORIGIN
The debate over sharing Kaveri water
predates to the late British era, where in the
Mysore princely state and the Chennai
presidency which was under the British raj
had to come into terms with agreeing on a
divide. The contention really arose when, in
1910, both states started devising plans for
construction of dams. The British arbitrated
the issue and define the respective shares of
water, and as to what area of farming land
are to be supported by these.
 IMPORTANCE OF ISSUE
 Kaveri water is vitally important for both the
states as people from Karnataka depend
upon it to satisfy their drinking needs,
whereas farmers from Kaveri delta in Tamil
Nadu depend upon it for agriculture and
livelihood.
 The fight for Kaveri river water become even
more important during rainfall deficient
years, as the entire basin delta of Kaveri River
falls under the drought prone area.
Therefore, Kaveri river water is the only
source of water in this region.
  As far as water resources are concerned,
around 53% of Kaveri water resources fall
within the geographic boundaries of
Karnataka, whereas only 30% of the water
resources fall within the geographic
boundaries of Tamil Nadu.
 On the other hand 54% of river basin area lies
in the state Tamil Nadu, whereas only 42% of
Kaveri river basin area is in Karnataka.
 As per the facts provided above, Karnataka
claims more rights over Kaveri water as the
river originates in the state and they hold 53%
of the water resources fall within their state.
WHAT’S THE CAUSE?
POLITICAL
INVOLMENT
In essence, it is not that the issue has been
created for political gains, although arguably,
it can serve to provide political mileage to
both the states, as measure to win the favour
of the farmers in the states. In the case of this
issue, typically each of the states acts as one
united entity to try and easy the situation for
the farmers in their own respective states.
IRRIGATION
The primary uses of Kaveri is providing water
irrigation, water for household consumption
and the generation of electricity. The water
for the Kaveri is primarily supplied by
monsoon rains. Dams, such as the Krishna raja
Sagara dam and Mettur dam, and those on its
tributaries such as Banasura Sagar dam
project on Kabini tributary store water from
monsoon periods and released the water
during the dry months.
IMPACT
The Kaveri River is not just a source of water
and livelihoods for people, but also has a
significant impact on the region's ecology and
economy. The river's water is used for
agriculture, drinking, and industrial purposes,
and its basin is home to several industries such
as textiles and paper. Dispute over the same
has caused a negative impact effecting people,
industries, ecology, economy but majorly
agriculture.
 OVER THE YEARS
In August 2016, Tamil Nadu government said that
there was a deficit of 50.0052 tmcft of water
released from Karnataka. The Karnataka
government said it wouldn't be able to release
any more Cauvery water due to low rainfall. Tamil
Nadu then sought Supreme Court's intervention.

On Sept 5, 2017 the SC ordered Karnataka

government to release 15,000 cusecs of water a
day for 10 days, to Tamil Nadu. This led to
widespread protests and bandhs in Karnataka.
After several modifications of the order, as of
Oct 18, the Karnataka government has been
directed by SC to release 2,000 cusecs of
water per day to Tamil Nadu till further
orders.

The apex court on February 16, 2018 gave its

final verdict saying that Karnataka will get
additional 14.75 TMC of the river water and
Tamil Nadu will get 177.25 instead of 192
TMC water. The court considered the water
scarcity in Bengaluru while delivering the
final judgment and also said no deviance
shall be shown by any state to the order.
 CURRENT SITUATION
The Cauvery dispute has flared up again, the first time after
2018 when the Supreme Court (SC) re-adjudicated the dispute
after a tribunal gave its award. The Court also directed the
creation of the Cauvery Water Management Authority
(CWMA) to implement the decision. The current round of
contestation began when Tamil Nadu approached the apex
court in August, seeking directions to Karnataka to release
Cauvery waters at the rate of 24,000 cusecs towards its due
share. Karnataka contested it stating unfavorable rainfall.
Eventually, the directions to Karnataka last week, asking it to
begin release at the rate of 3,000 cusecs, led to widespread
protests in the state. The Bengaluru Bandh on September 26,
and the statewide bandh on September 29 led to the arrest of
hundreds of persons, several cancelled flights and a halted
economy.
 CONCLUSION
The Kaveri River is a complex issue that requires a multi-faceted approach for resolution.
It is important for both states to come to a mutually beneficial agreement that takes into
account the needs of all stakeholders, including the river's ecology. In a transboundary
water-sharing context, conflict and cooperation coexist. We must supplement legal
adjudication with institutional responses that sustain cooperation and mitigate conflict.
Also, we need to reflect on how institutions like the CWMA can be improved, depending
on the way this episode pans out. We have models like the NCA that evolved out of
consensus and the CWMA that was created on Supreme Court directives. A renewed
emphasis on consensus building may be needed.
THANK YOU
Sadhya S Barnwal | 0969

Kalpana Poonia | 0978

Divya | 0970