EVS ASSIGNMENT

BY ANISHA RANA
1st year BA (HONS). HINDI
Roll no. 2018/1536
Hindu College
 Kaveri the River & Its Dispute:
What is it?
The Kaveri river is the source for an extensive irrigation system and for hydroelectric power.
The river has supported irrigated agriculture for centuries and served as the lifeblood of the
ancient kingdoms and modern cities of South India.

 The Kaveri Water dispute has been the source of a serious conflict between the two states
of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka.
The origin of this conflict rests in two agreements in 1892 and 1924 between the Madras
Presidency and Kingdom of Mysore. The 802 kilometres (498 mi) Cauvery river has
44,000 km2 basin area in Tamil Nadu and 32,000 km2 basin area in Karnataka.
•The 1924 agreement had been necessary because Madras had objected to Mysore building the
Krishnarajasagar dam across the Cauvery, and the agreement facilitated it by allowing Madras to
build the Mettur dam. A significant feature of the agreement was that it put restrictions on the
extent of area that could be safely irrigated by the two states by using the Kaveri waters.
•The basic dispute has always been about the sharing of waters in the Kaveri Basin. As per the
1892 and 1924 agreements the approximate river water allotments were as follows:
•75% to Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry,
23% to Karnataka, and 
the rest to Kerala.
What’s the main problem?
• Unlike major north and north-eastern rivers like Indus, Ganga and Brhamaputra which
originate from permanent glaciers, the Cauvery river is fed by seasonal monsoon rains
and several tributaries. So in times of a heavy monsoon rains, this region witnesses
excessive flow of water in the river and floods, but in times of insufficient rains, there is
a drought like situation, and as the irrigation needs of farmers are not met, the two
states indulge in the ancient ritual of blaming each other.
• While pre-Independence disputes between Mysore (now largely Karnataka) and
Madras (now largely Tamil Nadu and parts of Kerala) were largely settled through
arbitrations and agreements by the British, the division of water became a serious
issue after state-reorganisation. Starting from 1959 and throughout the 60s, Tamil
Nadu objected to Karnataka building two dams but the latter went ahead, as the fiver-
rounds of talks to solve the dispute failed.
• In 1974, Karnataka asserted that the 1924 agreement entailed a discontinuation of the
water supply to Tamil Nadu after 50 years and the dispute as we know it today
assumed centre-stage. Since the river originates in Karnataka, it argued, the state was
entitled how best to use the river's water and was not bound by the agreements
imposed on the maharaja of Mysore by the colonial government which, it added, were
skewed heavily in favour of Tamil Nadu.
• On the other hand, Tamil Nadu pleaded that it had already developed millions
acres of its agricultural land and as a result was heavily dependant on the
existing pattern of usage. It claimed that any change in this pattern would
adversely affect the livelihood of millions of farmers in the state.
• In short Tamil, Nadu wanted to maintain status quo over its share of water
while Karnataka wanted to tap most of the water flowing from its territory.
• Tamil Nadu, being the lower-riperian state, charges that Karnataka has built
new dams and expanded the agricultural areas irrigated by the available
water, thus affecting the water-supply down-stream. As a result, there has
been a dispute and tension between these two states over the division of
water. 
So was nothing done till now to
resolve the dispute?
In 1976, after a series of discussions between the two states and the union
government chaired by Jagjivan Ram, the then Irrigation Minister, a final draft
was prepared based on findings of the a Cauvery Fact Finding Committee
(CFFC) .
This draft was accepted by all states and the union government also made an
announcement to that effect in Parliament. However, Tamil Nadu came under
President’s rule soon after that and the agreement was put on the backburner.
The successive AIADMK government of M G Ramachandran rejected the draft
agreement and insisted that the 1924 agreement had only provided for an
extension and not a review. It demanded that a status quo should be restored
and everyone should go back to the agreements of 1892 and 1924. Several
meetings between the two states in the 1980s to find an amicable solution to
the problem proved futile as there was no meeting ground between the two.
So, is that why the Cauvery Water
Dispute Tribunal was formed?
•Yes. In 1986, a farmer’s association from Tanjavur in Tamil Nadu moved the Supreme Court demanding the
constitution of a tribunal for adjudication for the Cauvery water dispute.
• In February 1990, the Supreme Court, while hearing the petition, directed the two states to complete
negotiations before April 24. Following the failure of negotiations between the two states, the Supreme Court
directed the union government to constitute a tribunal to adjudicate the dispute and pass an award and
allocate water among the four states.
•In accordance with Section 4 of the Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956, the National Front government
headed by V.P. Singh constituted the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal on June 2, 1990 with Chittatosh
Mookerjee, retired chief justice of the Bombay High Court, as Chairman and N.S. Rao, retired judge of the
Patna High Court, and S.D. Agarwala, retired judge of the Allahabad High Court, as members. Justice
Mookerjee resigned in 1999 and N.P. Singh was appointed in his place. Thereafter, the four parties to the
dispute—Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala and Pondicherry — presented their demands to the Tribunal as
under:

Karnataka: 465 TMC 

Kerala: 99.8 TMC 
Pondicherry : 9.3 TMC 
Tamil Nadu - the flow of the water should be in accordance with the terms of the agreements of 1892
and 1924; that is 566 TMC for Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry; 177 TMC for Karnataka and 5 TMC for
Kerala.
.
• Thereafter, the four parties to the dispute—Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala
and Pondicherry — presented their demands to the Tribunal as under:

Karnataka: 465 TMC 

Kerala: 99.8 TMC 
Pondicherry : 9.3 TMC 
Tamil Nadu - the flow of the water should be in accordance with the terms of
the agreements of 1892 and 1924; that is 566 TMC for Tamil Nadu and
Pondicherry; 177 TMC for Karnataka and 5 TMC for Kerala.

• (TMC: Thousand Million Cubic feet) 

 Battle older than 100 years….
• In 2007, the tribunal declared its final award, in which it said Tamil Nadu
should receive 419 tmcft of water, more than double the amount mentioned in
the interim order. Karnataka wasn't pleased. The award required Karnataka to
release 192 tmcft of water to Tamil Nadu in ten monthly instalments every
year. The Centre made the notification of the award public only in 2013, after
the Supreme Court ordered it do so.
• In August this year, the Tamil Nadu government said that there was a deficit of
50.0052 tmcft (thousand million cubic feet) of water released from Karnataka
reservoirs, with respect to the minimum limit directed by the CDWT. 

The Karnataka government said it wouldn't be able to release any more

Cauvery water, as low rainfall during the monsoon had left its reservoirs half-
empty. Tamil Nadu then sought the apex court's intervention saying its
farmers needed the water to begin cultivating samba crops.
 Widespread Protests
• On September 5, the Supreme Court ordered the 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. Farmers there said they didn't
have enough water for their own farms. Properties in Tamil Nadu were also
damaged.
• Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah wrote to Prime Minister Narendra
Modi on September 9 and said that releasing 15,000 cusecs of Cauvery water
would "completely deprive" Bengaluru of the river's basin of drinking water. 
• He also said prolonged unrest would hurt the state's IT sector, and noted that
even the state BJP had asked his government not to implement the Supreme
Court's order.
Protest still goes on..
• The battle still goes on till this day. The latest one being the 2018 dispute.
• 2018 Kaveri River water dispute is a series of on going protests on the issue of
water sharing problems from the River Kaveri between Tamil Nadu
and Karnataka which are the two main states of India.
• The water dispute has been a major controversial issue between Tamil Nadu and
Karnataka over the years and the issue has been raised further with protests have
been conducted across the state of Tamil Nadu by several groups including from
the large pile of actors and directors who have temporarily stopped working on
their projects, films over the Karnataka's sharing the Kaveri water to Tamil Nadu.
• The delay in establishing a Cauvery Management Board in order to share equal
river share award has sparked off protests in Tamil Nadu against the Karnataka
state government.
• The Karnataka Legislative Assembly election, 2018 which was a major concern in
the state of Karnataka following the breakout of major Kaveri river water scandal
has heaped in among several political dramatic turnarounds in the state with both
main politicians B. S. Yeddyurappa and Siddaramaiah being historically defeated at
the assembly elections.
• Supreme Court (SC) on 9 January 2018 declared that it would pronounce its
verdict clearing all the pending cases and the confusion within a month. On
16 February 2018, the Supreme Court has pronounced its verdict. The
Supreme Court urged to reduce 14 tmc water allocation to Tamil Nadu and
requested Karnataka to release only 177 tmc of water to Tamil Nadu for next
15 years. The verdict also mandated to formally constitute the Kavery river
management board by the union government within 40 days for implementing
strictly the tribunal award and its verdict.
• Karnataka shown its unhappiness in setting up Cauvery Management
Board for monitoring water availability and use as part of the Supreme Court
verdict. Union government is also not comfortable with the SC verdict to form
the Cauvery management board with in the stipulated period.
• However the Supreme Court pulled out to establish the Cauvery Management
Board as the Centre failed to submit the documents within the deadline and
asked the Centre to formulate and draft the Cauvery Management scheme by
May 3. The SC also directed the authorities of both Tamil Nadu and
Karnataka to maintain calm and peace in the meantime.
• On 18 May, the Supreme Court ordered that a marginal amount of 14.75 TMC
water is to be supplied to Karnataka while Tamil Nadu would receive an
amount of 177 TMC.
• The Karnataka Legislative Assembly election, 2018 which was held on 12
May 2018 sparked criticisms from Tamil Nadu over the Karnataka's
government for not addressing the issue properly and for its delay in setting
up a Kaveri Management Board. The Supreme Court also issued a strict
notice to the Karnataka state government for using the Karnataka Legislative
state election as an excuse to resolve the Kaveri riverwater crisis with Tamil
Nadu cannot be acceptable.
THANK YOU