Tamil Nadu's application in the Supreme Court sought directions to restrain Karnataka from constructing a reservoir on the Markandeya River.
Published Nov 29, 2024 | 9:50 AM ⚊ Updated Nov 29, 2024 | 8:50 PM
Pennar River (supplied)
Following the failure of talks between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu over sharing the Pennar River’s water, the Union government is likely to establish a separate tribunal to resolve the dispute. The negotiation meeting between the two states broke down as Tamil Nadu insisted on the formation of a tribunal.
The Union Ministry of Jal Shakti had earlier constituted a negotiation committee to settle the issue between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, following directives from the Supreme Court in January 2024.
This was in the backdrop of Karnataka’s construction of the Yargol Dam in Kolar, with a maximum storage capacity of 0.5 TMC. It emerged as a major point of contention as Tamil Nadu strongly objected to the construction of the reservoir.
In this regard, Tamil Nadu filed an interlocutory application in the Supreme Court in 2019 seeking directions to restrain Karnataka from constructing the reservoir on the Markandeya River, a tributary of Pennar.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court instructed the Union government to submit a report on the negotiation committee’s findings on Tuesday, 26 November. With Tamil Nadu unwilling to resolve the matter through negotiation, the centre is required to establish a tribunal as per the Interstate River Water Disputes Act, 1956.
The Penna River dispute has been ongoing for the last five years, with Tamil Nadu unwilling to negotiate water-sharing with Karnataka.
The Pennar river originates in Nandidurga range’s Chennakesava hill in the Chikkaballapura district of Karnataka and flows through Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, eventually draining into the Bay of Bengal. The total length of the river from origin to its outfall in the Bay of Bengal is 597 km.
The principal tributaries of the river are Markandeya, Jayamangali, Kunderu, Sagileru, Chiravati, Papagni, and Cheyyeru.
An official in the Department of Water Resources in Karnataka told South First on condition of anonymity: “Markandeya is a tributary of Pennar River. We have constructed a small dam on the Markandeya River, to facilitate drinking water for Kolar. To be specific, this dam ensures water supply for 48 villages, including Kolar and KGF town.”
The official explained, “Tamil Nadu is mainly objecting to the construction of the Yargol dam. They claim that the Pennar River’s natural flow has been impacted badly. It is a small dam, with mere 0.5 TMC capacity. But the state argues that in the 1924 agreement (between the states of Mysore and Madras before Independence) there is no provision to build any reservoirs across any stream. We say that there is a provision to build dams for drinking water.”
Despite efforts by the Union Ministry of Jal Shakti to mediate and resolve the issue amicably through a negotiation committee, both states remained firm on their respective stands, leading to a breakdown in talks.
Tamil Nadu’s interlocutory application in the Supreme Court sought directions to restrain Karnataka from constructing a reservoir on the Markandeya River – the first legal objection against Karnataka by the neighbouring state.
Tamil Nadu argued that since Markandeya is a tributary of the Pennar, any dam construction by Karnataka would obstruct the natural downstream flow.
A senior official from Karnataka told South First: “Karnataka has only 11tmc yield from the Pennar River and the reservoir we have built is purely for drinking water purposes. We informed the Supreme Court that, as it is a small river, the issues can be resolved through negotiation, and there is no need to establish a tribunal.”
The court agreed when Karnataka requested that Centre be allowed to chair the negotiation meetings between the two states and granted a six-month timeline. The negotiation was held last week under the chairmanship of the Central Water Commission (CWC) and representatives of the states, he said.
“While we have a minor issue with Andhra Pradesh, that can be resolved. Tamil Nadu remains fixated on the 1924 agreement and continues to object to the construction of the Yargol Dam. It was not willing to engage in negotiations but was compelled to participate due to the Supreme Court’s directives. Even in previous discussions, we could not reach an agreement,” the official elaborated.
“The fresh negotiation committee was formed in August 2024. The committee has visited Karnataka three times and conducted around eight meetings so far, all of which ended unsuccessfully,” he added.
The Union government is now expected to establish a separate tribunal to address the issue under provisions of the Interstate River Water Disputes Act, 1956.
A senior official who did not wish to be named in this report said, “CWC members conducted a field inspection including a visit to the Yargol Dam. After inspecting concerned areas, they confirmed that the dam was constructed solely for drinking water purposes and not for irrigation activities.”
He continued: “However, considering the reservoir’s construction, the CMC recommended that we release a portion of water from the Yargol Dam, which receives inflows from the Markandeya River, to Tamil Nadu. It also suggested releasing 15 percent of the dam’s daily inflow to the state.”
Karnataka expressed that 15 percent was too high a percentage, and proposed to ensure an environmental flow of around 7.5 percent of the inflow instead, according to the official.
“Even though the centre finalised this proposal, Tamil Nadu rejected it outright and insisted on a tribunal for the Pennar River dispute. The Supreme Court has now directed the government to submit a report on the negotiations. Had the state been open to negotiations, we could have worked towards a resolution,” he told South First.
He further added that, “Even CWC chairman Rakesh Kumar Verma urged Tamil Nadu to reconsider negotiations, but they categorically refused and reiterated their demand for a tribunal. As per the Interstate River Water Disputes Act, 1956, disputes over water sharing between states must first be addressed through negotiation. If these fail, the centre is obliged to establish a tribunal.”
(Edited by Rosamma Thomas)
