The Hindu : Tamil Nadu / Chennai News : Mullaperiyar row a repeat of Sutlej-Yamuna canal dispute

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Monday, Mar 20, 2006

Tamil Nadu

Tamil Nadu - Chennai

Mullaperiyar row a repeat of Sutlej-Yamuna canal dispute

T. Ramakrishnan

The row has two precedents on inter-state river water disputes

CHENNAI: The controversy over the Kerala Assembly adopting legislation last week on the Mullaperiyar dam and several other dams in that State has two parallel precedents in the subject of inter-state river water disputes.

As in the case of Kerala, the two instances were sequels to judicial pronouncements.

Of the two, one pertains to the water sharing arrangement for the Ravi, the Beas and the Sutlej rivers involving Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan and Himachal Pradesh. The other relates to the Cauvery water dispute concerning primarily Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. Kerala's legislation was framed in the context of the Supreme Court's verdict in late February, allowing the water level of Mullaperiyar to be raised from the present 136 ft to 142 ft. Also, it was directed to cooperate with Tamil Nadu in carrying out strengthening measures for the dam.

Last week, the Kerala Assembly met and passed an amendment to the Kerala Irrigation and Water Conservation Act, limiting the full reservoir level to 136 ft for Mullaperiyar. Twenty-one other dams in the State have also been covered under the new legislation. The Amendment Bill gives the Dam Safety Authority powers to direct the `custodian' of any dam to suspend the functioning of the dam concerned, restrict its functioning and decommission it in the event of any threat to human life or property.

The Mullaperiyar row appears to be a repeat of what happened in 2004 in Punjab.

In June 2004, the Supreme Court directed the Central Government to take over the implementation of the construction of a portion of the Sutlej-Yamuna canal lying in Punjab. It also asked the Centre to appoint a Central agency and an empowered committee to oversee the implementation. Under the order, Punjab should hand over the SYL canal site to the Central agency.

The Apex Court had also rejected a review petition filed by Punjab on its order given in January 2002 on the subject.

In July 2004, the Punjab Assembly adopted legislation, terminating the 1981 agreement that Punjab signed along with the neighbouring States on the sharing of the river waters. This development rocked Parliament and the Centre went in for a Presidential reference to the Supreme Court. The matter is before the Court.

In June 1991, the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal gave its interim order, directing Karnataka to release 205 thousand million cubic feet (tmc ft) to Tamil Nadu. Karnataka subsequently promulgated an ordinance (which was later adopted as an Act), seeking to nullify this. A political controversy developed and in July, the Union Government made a Presidential reference to the Supreme Court.

Four months later, the Court declared the ordinance unconstitutional and advised the Centre to gazette the interim order of the Tribunal. In December 1991, the Union Government had notified the interim order in its gazette.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail