More than water

British-era origins, politically sacrosanct: The Cauvery dispute in six points

44-NOT-A-DROP-TO-SPARE (File) Infographics from THE WEEK issue dated September 25, 2016

A Supreme Court bench, comprising Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra and Justices Amitava Roy and A.M. Khanwilkar, is expected to deliver its verdict on the Cauvery river water dispute at 10.30am on Friday.

With the Cauvery dispute considered the oldest, and arguably most serious, dispute between states in India, we try to break down the issue in these six points:

  • Where does the Cauvery flow

    The Cauvery originates in Kodagu in Karnataka, but more than 50 per cent of the River Basin is in Tamil Nadu, with small tributaries also flowing into Kerala and Puducherry. Karnataka and Tamil Nadu are the two main parties to the river dispute.

  • Genesis of the Cauvery dispute

    The Cauvery issue, like many contentious problems in India, had its origins in the British era. In 1911, the princely state of Mysore agreed to seek the permission of the Madras presidency before undertaking any irrigation projects on the river. The dispute began after the reorganisation of states in 1956, with Karnataka claiming that an agreement reached in 1924 was valid for 50 years.

  • Scientific reasons for the dispute

    Unlike other major rivers such as the Ganga and Brahmaputra, which originate from permanent glaciers in the Himalayas, the Cauvery is fed by seasonal rains and tributaries. As a result, the quantum of water in it can fluctuate from flooding in good monsoon years to near-drought situations, in the event of a bad monsoon. While the river is a source for both agricultural and drinking water, it is considered to be the main source of drinking water for Bengaluru and parts of Karnataka, accentuating its symbolic importance.

  • The Cauvery Water Dispute Tribunal

    The tribunal was established in 1990 by the VP Singh government, following a Supreme Court directive, with the intention of allocating quantum of water between the four riparian states. The Tribunal announced its final verdict in 2007, giving Tamil Nadu 419 billion cubic feet and Karnataka 270 billion cubic feet, leading to protests from both sides and filing of review petitions.

  • Effectiveness of Tribunal, SC interventions

    While the water dispute has mostly stayed dormant in years with good monsoons, tensions have flared up in drought years. In 2002, Karnataka stopped the flow of water to Tamil Nadu following farmers' protests and even ignored Supreme Court strictures. In September 2016, after the SC directed Karnataka to supply 15,000 cusecs of water for 10 days to TN, mass protests broke out in Karnataka, including a near-unprecedented shutdown of Bengaluru for 2 days; the SC later modified its order as a result.

  • Political nightmare: Election year in Karnataka, instability in TN

    While the dispute has been a near permanent 'fixture' in ties between the states, the verdict comes at a time when Karnataka is facing imminent elections and Tamil Nadu's ruling party, the AIADMK, faces a crisis of credibility. As a result, political parties in the two states will find it difficult to resist populist demands against concessions, while the BJP, competing for power in Karnataka, will face its own dilemmas with regard to Central intervention.

This browser settings will not support to add bookmarks programmatically. Please press Ctrl+D or change settings to bookmark this page.

Related Reading