The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed Karnataka to release 6,000 cusecs of the Cauvery water per day to Tamil Nadu for a period of one week beginning Wednesday. The order came as some respite for Tamil Nadu as the Central Supervisory Committee headed by Water Resources Secretary had on Monday directed Karnataka to supply Tamil Nadu 3,000 cusecs of the Cauvery water till September 30.
While Tamil Nadu would now get double the share fixed by the Committee, Karnataka’s burden also will get reduced as prior to the Committee ruling, the Supreme Court had directed the State to release 12,000 cusecs of the Cauvery water to Tamil Nadu. This order expired on Tuesday.
The SC asked Additional Solicitor General Pinky Anand to issue a notification constituting the Cauvery Water Management Board (CWMB) within four weeks.
However, the interim arrangement fixed by the Court was to remain till the next date of hearing, September 27.
Surprisingly, it was Karnataka which approached the apex court challenging the Committee’s decision. On reading the order, the Bench expressed reservations on how the Committee determined the quantum when both States had not given their consent. The Bench of Justices Dipak Misra and UU lalit said, “We are not experts. It is a natural situation that when rain god is not kind and there is deficit of rain, issue emerges as to what should be the quantum of water sharing. We have a fundamental doubt whether the committee can determine the quantum when all it had to do was to apprise us on the deficit.”
At the same time, the court did not wish to leave the matter hanging as it said, “It is a serious matter.” The SC recalled that the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal decision of 2007 had ordered for a CWMB to be set up for any changes in the quantum of water sharing in order to ensure implementation of the Tribunal’s direction.
The court said, “The CMB has to be constituted as it is an expert body. Without it, a pro-tem committee cannot manage the implementation of the Tribunal’s decision.”
Senior advocate Fali S Nariman, who appeared for Karnataka, argued that the State is reeling under deficit monsoons since June and in this circumstance it was difficult to abide by the Tribunal’s order to provide 192 tmc water to Tamil Nadu for irrigation purposes. Tamil Nadu on the other hand submitted that Karnataka was already in default of its commitment to supply water. If deficit monsoon is to be blamed for this deficit, senior advocate Shekhar Naphade, appearing for TN, submitted that Karnataka can proportionately reduce the quantum.