Three resolutions were passed at the meeting of legislative parties, which highlighted the Supreme Court order which said no construction should be carried out in Mekedatu in the absence of approval from lower riparian states. TN’s concern is its farmers would be denied their rightful share of water from River Cauvery once this project gets under way.

The issue gained momentum over the past few weeks when farmers in Tiruchy held a protest against Karnataka’s decision. Stakeholders from TN argued that the construction of a new reservoir at Mekedatu would prevent the release of excess water during floods and have a detrimental impact on the Cauvery delta farmers. These farmers depend on the Mettur Dam, which stores the Cauvery water and is used for cultivating paddy during the Kuruvai season. The Rs 9,000 cr Mekedatu balancing reservoir and drinking water project, was conceived in the 70’s. And it aims at offering drinking water sufficiency to Bengaluru, whose needs will increase in the years to come. Bengaluru uses up 1,450 mn litres per day (MLD) of Cauvery water, but the requirement will surge to 2,900 MLD by 2030.

The project will also generate up to 400 MW of electricity. As per the Supreme Court’s instruction, 4.75 TMC of water will be lifted to be used as drinking water, Karnataka CM BS Yediyurappa said, adding it will not affect the lives of TN farmers as the water will not be diverted towards irrigation. The NGT has also given the green signal to the project. This latest episode has once again ignited the decades-long Cauvery water-sharing issue. The first major legislation to resolve such disputes was introduced by the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act of 1956. As per the Act, any state in dispute with another over river sharing could approach the Centre to constitute a tribunal. The idea was to protect the interests of downstream states that could be deprived of their share by activities in upstream states.

The Ministry of Water Resources has listed as many as five inter-state water disputes and tribunals. These include the Cauvery River Water Disputes, Krishna River Water Disputes Tribunal, Mahadayi/Mandovi River Dispute, Vansadhara River Water Dispute and Ravi and Beas Water Dispute Tribunal. Most of these have been continuing for decades and have no easy answers. A gazette notification regarding the Cauvery Dispute was issued in December 1991, that guaranteed 205 TMC of water annually to TN.

This led to unprecedented violence against Tamilians in Karnataka, which saw many casualties. The decision of the Tribunal was notified in 2013, but the water supply for TN was nowhere near the quantum ordered by the Court. Presently, TN, Puducherry, Karnataka, and Kerala share riparian rights for the rain-fed Cauvery. Karnataka is waiting for the approval of the Central Water Commission for its detailed project report on Mekedatu. Environmental clearances are also being sought from the Environment Ministry.

The project will have a major impact on the surrounding ecosystem. About 5,050 hectares of forest land along with 3,180 acres of the Cauvery wildlife sanctuary will be submerged as a fallout of the construction. The Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal has not restricted Karnataka from implementing the project as long as TN gets its due – 192 tmcft of water annually.

On the plus side, in rain-deficit years, the water stored in the dam can help TN if the aforementioned supply gets cut off. The leaders of the two states must deliberate over the impact of the project in an apolitical manner. Resorting to one-upmanship won’t lead anywhere, as one can’t argue over the flow of the river, but merely ensure the precious water it carries is not restricted or wasted as a result of a politically charged narrative.