State to seek 15,000 cusecs from Karnataka this month
“As of this week, Karnataka must make a good shortfall of 9 tmcft from June 1 to August 29,” highly placed sources in the State government disclosed to DT Next.
Mettur dam
CHENNAI: The government of Tamil Nadu, which has moved the Supreme Court to secure release of 24,000 cusecs of Cauvery water from Karnataka in August, believes the quantum of water-discharge from the neighbour must be 15,000 cusecs in September.
“As of this week, Karnataka must make a good shortfall of 9 tmcft from June 1 to August 29,” highly placed sources in the State government disclosed to DT Next. “They owe another 9 tmcft within the next fortnight. Together, we’ve worked out the daily discharge due to us (Tamil Nadu) at 15,000 cusecs for the next 15 days.”
Admitting that the quantum of daily water discharge from the neighbouring State, as per the 2018 verdict of the Supreme Court, was 18,000 cusecs and 13,000 cusecs for August and September, respectively, the source reasoned that they have calculated the discharge-demand based on the deficit and current inflows, and taking into the account the Apex court verdict.
“We agree that Karnataka had close to 30% deficit in rainfall in the Cauvery catchments during the southwest monsoon season. They also have a 50% deficit in their total inflows in the 4 reservoirs in the Cauvery Basin this year. We do not treat it as a normal water year either. We’ve placed demands only after factoring in the rainfall and inflow deficits, and the rightful share owed to us as per the pro-rata water-sharing formula,” said the source.
Quantum of discharge is worked out by calculating the inflow to the 4 reservoirs – Kabini, Krishnaraja Sagar, Hemavathi and Harangi on yearly and monthly basis against the average inflows in the last 30 years.
Echoing the views of the State Irrigation Minister Duraimurugan, who most recently accused the Cauvery Water Management Authority (CWMA) of being ‘lethargic’ in its approach to the issue, State Irrigation Department source said that they have moved the Supreme Court as the CWMA has obliged Karnataka and calculated the quantum of water discharge in an arbitrary manner.
Understandably, the State government has prayed the Apex court now to direct the CWMA to develop a scientific formula for deciding the share of water to States in distress years in accordance with the 2018 SC judgment. The plea of a lower riparian Tamil Nadu, which relies mostly on the flow in the largest water source (Cauvery River) for its irrigation needs, makes sense considering that the perennial water dispute rears its ugly head whenever there’s a monsoon deficit, which affects inflow in the Cauvery basin dams in Karnataka.
This is not the first time an adamant Karnataka refuses to oblige TN. A similar stand-off was witnessed in January 2018 when the Siddaramaiah-led Congress-JD(S) government categorically rejected the water release demand of then Chief Minister Edappadi K Palansiwami who flagged that the neighbour had only released 111.64 tmcft, instead of 179.87 tmcft (shortfall of over 67 tmcft) for June 2017 — January 9, 2018. EPS had sought an immediate release of 7 tmcft (water level in Mettur Stanley Reservoir was an abysmal 21.27 tmcft then).
EPS, who had blamed the Chief Minister a few days ago, for not raising the issue in INDIA alliance meet in Bengaluru, had also moved the court to get Karnataka to release water and constituting the Cauvery Management Board, which has now been debatably reduced to relatively ‘toothless’ CWMA, much to the chagrin of Tamil Nadu.
Years prior, former Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa had also threatened to move a contempt petition against the then Jagadish Shettar-led Karnataka government for not releasing water to TN and delay in constituting the Cauvery Management Board. Though the 2018 SC verdict lent some clarity on the quantum of water to be shared between the lower riparian states, the absence of a transparent distress-sharing formula has been contributing to frayed tempers on both ends of the Cauvery River.
“Had there been a scientifically worked out transparent distress-sharing formula in place, the two states would have shared the water without the differences as we see now. In a normal water year, the sharing goes as per the SC verdict. If a similar formula were available for distress year, the states would have stuck to the numbers. The absence of such a formula has led to two states differing in their computation of pro-rata water share,” reasoned the official.
