All the noise and bustle relating to the problems relating to Mahanadi water have not been yielding any tangible results. The failure of a tripartite meeting, deaf ears of the concerned authority and, finally, lack of response from the Prime Minister to the letter of Odisha Chief Minister have goaded the State Government to approach the Supreme Court, which has to be persuaded with factual details submitted through proper affidavits. There will be a first hurdle to be overcome by the State in explaining its own conduct over a span of about 15 years.
In the year 2001, there was an adjournment motion in the Assembly by MlA Ashok Das. His question expressed apprehensions regarding the construction works going on in Chhattisgarh. He stated that if the constructions were not halted, the Hirakud Dam would be in jeopardy. The response through the Chief Minister was an assurance that no further constructions would be permitted without consent of the Government of Odisha. There was no frontal opposition to the ongoing or completed constructions and the reply might quite be based on generalities rather than detailed analysis of facts as revealed through records. Of course, a representative of the ruling BJD has spoken the unpleasant truth in revealing that very often departments supply misleading information, which is transmitted to the House. In retrospect, this could be a case of that nature. By 2006-07, despite all this bravado on our part, the Chhattisgarh Government built six barrages on the Mahanadi and another over river Hansdeo. As late as 2010, our concerned Minister went on record in the Assembly that none of the barrages that were constructed or were under construction would have any adverse impact on the quantum of water flowing into Odisha. Now five or six years later, we are crying hoarse that we have been wronged. The Chhattisgarh Government has taken law into its own hand and the Centre has maintained a sphinx-like silence.
The last resort has, therefore, been undertaken without treating it earlier to be a contingent requirement. This would have necessitated parallel action along with a movement being organised for political purposes. Compulsion now drives Odisha to the apex court. When the Hirakud Dam was conceived of and a project report was prepared, the minimum flow of water in Hirakud was around 20.61 million acre feet. The optimum need for the Hirakud project was around 12.28 million acre feet. The project report also indicated that in the upper catchment area, around 8.33 million acre feet of water would remain undisturbed. During the seasonal rains, there would be much more of water than required by the catchment area in Chhattisgarh and the downstream area in Odisha. The tall claim of the Chhattisgarh Government stated to be in the requirement level of about 25 million acre feet and water has to be punctured, and we have to produce counter evidence to convince the court on the tribunal regarding the equitable share that would fairly be available to the two States from out of the total quantum of water in the inter-State river. In the context of those projects that have been completed, the nature of an interim order would become precarious. A counter argument against Odisha would be that there has been alteration in the availability of water in the Mahanadi since the days of construction of Hirakud almost six decades ago. The minimum flow in 1947 was reportedly of about 20.61 million acre feet, which now stands reduced to almost half. It could be further argued that in the years of failure of monsoon in the catchment areas, the allocation figures of water for the two States have to be made circumstantially equitable calling for necessary correction.
There is also likelihood that the details of facts may first be worked out by a tribunal, and the Supreme Court would act on the basis of the report of the tribunal. This would of course involve participation of all interested parties with meaningful opportunity of hearing and stating the case of each party. The tribunal is a long-drawn and costly affair and stepping into that arena now looks inevitable. The raw data produced by both the sides will be first evaluated by the tribunal and later handled by the apex court. Very rarely as the Supreme Court decides allocations of inter-State water at the initial stage, though if convinced, it could do so pending any action before a tribunal. It may also be pointed out to us that about 300 km of river runs within Chhattisgarh. It cannot, therefore, be said that during non-monsoon seasons the entire length will be bereft of any share of water. This may not stand the test of the reason and relevance.
The exercise that should be projected by Odisha should be in first presenting the objective criteria of legitimate and fair share, both in years of failure or of good monsoon. It has to be stated and highlighted that pumping of water and retention of water within Chhattisgarh may dry up the supply to Hirakud in a substantial manner. But we have to back it up with an adequate databank. Think tanks have to work as dynamos so as to protect the interest of the people of Odisha and provide any possible assistance that the State Government may require in this sphere of a last-ditch battle through litigation. Our indolence of the last number of years has turned into a liability. To a great extent, we are directionless in terms of collation of data. The case involves the interest of one and all belonging to the State, and the issues involved are of very serious nature relating to the lifeblood of the State. Any lack of caution or preparation in our efforts before the apex court or the tribunal can be very costly. The future years are not looking to be easy ones, and our preparation does not appear to have been supported by sufficient analysis and deliberation. This will have an impact on the future that dominantly belongs to the youths of the present day. They must form themselves into study groups and acquire the skill and information so that they could form pressure groups so as to nudge the Government towards the right direction. The study and movement of this nature will make the youth power sensitive to and conscious of our natural resources and the hazards that are linked with their availability. We had hitherto not faced any major problem in so far as water as a resource is concerned. But as years go by, we shall feel the pinch of lack of adequate clean resources and that will have an adverse impact on our future projections. In this venture of the youth brigades, the alert and informed elders should play the role of catalysts and ensure that the youths become aware of the pros and cons of such major problems that the State has to tackle. In the days of modern technology, the voice of the so-called insignificant can also reach the highest. In the present case, we have to reach material from the slippery water of the Mahanadi to the portals of the apex court. This requires an organised effort on the part not of any particular section of the society but should encompass one and all. Involvement of each one of us turns inevitable. This definitely concerns us all!
.
(The writer, a Senior Advocate, is a former All India Service officer, a former diplomat, a former editor, a former President of Orissa High Court Bar Association and a former Advocate General of Odisha. jayantdas@hotmail.com)