The last fortnight witnessed a high voltage drama enacted by former Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister and the Telugu Desam Party President N.Chandrababu Naidu along with his party’s 66 MPs, MLAs and MLCs near the Andhra Pradesh-Maharashtra border, on an intended visit to the site of Babli project in Maharashtra to make an on-the-spot study of the on-going works there, their arrest by Maharashtra police and subsequent release.
The Babli project is a barrage with a capacity of 2 tmc built by Maharashtra across the Godavari river in Pochampad dam area on Maharashtra-Andhra border. Andhra Pradesh is objecting to the dam, complaining that it would reverse water flow and affect inflows into Sriramsagar reservoir that irrigates Nizamabad, Karim Nagar, Warangal and Adilabad districts.
Ahead of a meeting of an all-party delegation from the state led by Chief Minister K.Rosaiah with Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh in New Delhi on July 26, Chandrababu Naidu charged the Union government with not safeguarding the interests of the state even after the award of the Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal, orders of the Central Water Commission and an agreement between the Chief Ministers of both states of not going ahead with the construction of Babli and 13 other “illegal projects.” The Maharashtra government did not follow the interim order of the Supreme Court against 13 proposed gates.
Clarifying that the campaign against the Babli project was directed against the Maharashtra government and not against the people of that state, Naidu has said, “There is no controversy between the people of Maharashtra and Telangana. Maharashtra Chief Minister Ashok Chavan is going ahead with the project since it is in his constituency, Nanded.” However, Naidu’s ‘adventure’ yatra was not well received by other major opposition parties in the state. Praja Rajyam President actor Chiranjeevi had dubbed TDP’s yatra as selfish an narrow minded because the CM was to lead an all-party delegation to the Prime Minister. Moreover Naidu did not inform of his proposal to other opposition parties as well because Naidu wanted to usurp the credit for himself, he said.
Telangana Rashtra Samiti Chief K.Chandra- sekhara Rao charged that the TDP was staging the protest with an eye on the by-polls to 12 Assembly constituencies last week. In fact political observers in the state read political agenda of the TDP chief of closing his ranks in the disturbed Telangana region and scoring over other opposition parties in view of the by-elections.
Chandrababu Naidu announced that his party would lead the fight for the rights of the lower riparian states in sharing of river waters. While advocating a national debate on the rights of the lower riparian states, he said the TDP would launch a campaign against upper riparian states impinging on these rights and to ensure peaceful coexistence of all states.
In the meanwhile, the all-party preparatory meeting convened by Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister on the eve of meeting with the Prime Minister, decided to seek a law for the protection of the rights of the lower riparian states.
People of Tamil Nadu, especially from the Northern districts, must be closely observing the developments in the Andhra Pradesh vis-à-vis Maharashtra. When Chandrababu Naidu along with his party workers, was arrested on July 16 last by the Maharashtra police and lodged in Dharmabad, bus services from Tamil Nadu to Andhra Pradesh were suspended following the bandh call given by the TDP. The bandh was almost total in Chittoor district, especially in Kuppam area, Naidu’s home constituency.
Interestingly, it was the people of this region who were persistent with the construction of a dam across the river Palar passing through Ganeshpuram bordering Tamil Nadu. It was during Naidu’s tenure as Chief Minister, that a series of 32 check dams were built across the Palar, ignoring the rights of the lower riparian in Tamil Nadu. It was he who had launched the Ganeshpuram dam project and when there were protests from lower riparian state of Tamil Nadu, he had simply brushed it aside claiming that the needs of his constituency, Kuppam were primary to him. But now he is accusing Maharashtra Chief Minister Ashok Chavan of going ahead with Babli project because it lies in his constituency, showing Naidu’s double standard. Changing the track now, Naidu talks about riparian rights of six Telangana districts and the high-handedness of Maharashtra in proposing the construction of the Babli dam.
While speaking about the rights of lower riparian states, everyone will find Tamil Nadu as the most handicapped state in the whole of India, its natural, geographical and legal rights of share in river waters being infringed upon by all the three surrounding neighbouring states of Karnataka, Kerala and Andhra Pradesh. The state is entangled with all the neighbouring upper riparian states in long drawn disputes for its entitled and justified share of river waters.
Unlike major rivers in the north like Indus, Ganga and Brahmaputra, which are perennial, the rivers in the south of the Vindyas are monsoon-fed and flowing only for few months in a year, turning the task of conservation and distribution of the scarce water cumbersome. In the face of linguistic reoganisation of states from the erstwhile presidencies and princely states in the pre-Independence days, demands and denials have gradually taken competitive political and chauvinist overtones, thus complicating the process of conciliation in disputes and also leading to violations of the orders of the statutory judicial establishments.
Tamil Nadu is the aggrieved state in respect of Cauvery river water dispute with Karnataka, storage level of Mullaiperiyar dam dispute with Kerala and some other major disputes relating to West-flowing rivers and Palar river water dispute with Andhra Pradesh.
Decades of negotiations between the states involved in Cauvery river water dispute bore no fruit and the Central government finally constituted a Tribunal in 1990 to look into the matter. The Tribunal after hearing all the parties involved for 16 years, delivered its final verdict on 5 February 2007. In its verdict, the Tribunal allocated 419 billion cubic feet of water annually to Tamil Nadu, 270 tmc to Karnataka, 30 tmc to Kerala and 7 tmc to Puducherry. The Tribunal also fixed monthwise quantum of water to be released to Tamil Nadu. Unhappy with the decision, the Karnataka government filed a revision petition before the Tribunal seeking a review.
The delay in permanent settlement of the Cauvery dispute, now and then take ugly turns and there are accusations and counter accusations being thrown all around in both states. The dispute had already spilled onto the streets of the states. Whenever the Supreme Court ordered Karnataka to comply with the Cauvery River Authority or orders of the Tribunal, the matter gets precipitated on the streets degenerating into a free-for-all and sundry from both states joining the protests. Film stars and various other cross sections of society from both states join protests. The belligerence hit a crescendo as some lumpen Kannadiga outfits attacking Tamils living in that state and on theatres screening Tamil films. Some groups in Tamil Nadu called for a stoppage of power from the Neyveli power station to Karnataka as a tit-for-tat measure. A pan-Tamil militant outfit once went ahead and blasted a major power transformer supplying power to neighbouring states. In short the protracting solution for the dispute give rise to avoidable regional and ethnic jingoism and violence.
Opposition political parties in both states utilize every opportunity to score political brownie points over the ruling parties in either state. For instance the BJP leadership in Karnataka exploited the Hogenakkal drinking water project within the boundaries of Tamil Nadu for providing drinking water to two districts from out of its share of water, manoeuvred to rouse passions and captured power in that state.
The Kerala government refused to honour the Supreme Court order of February 2006 to raise the water level in the Mullaiperiyar dam initially from 134 ft upto 142 ft. The Congress-led UDF government in that state then enacted an amendment to its Irrigation and Water Conservation Act which in effect nullified the Supreme Court order, with the full support of the CPM-led opposition LDF. The Kerala government also ignored the reports of expert committees, constituted by the Centre for the safety of the dam. Now the Supreme Court has constituted a five-member Empowered Committee on the dispute. The truth of the safety of the dam was brought out by a seven-member committee, headed by Member of the Central Water Commission B.K.Mittal constituted by the Union Water Resources Ministry in June 2000. Now the arguments are again made before the present empowered committee which will have to present its report to the Supreme Court.
Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh have been at loggerheads over the Palar project at Kuppam proposed across the Palar river. Tamil Nadu argues that since the Palar river is an inter-state river (originating in Karnataka, entering Andhra Pradesh at Ganeshpuram off Kuppam and entering Tamil Nadu for its long and final course to join the sea), the Andhra Pradesh government must have sounded it before taking up the project. It feels that the construction of the dam across the Palar on the upper reaches would badly affect the irrigation needs of vast chunks of lands located in its side in northern and northwestern districts. In that state also, the erstwhile TDP government envisaged and laid foundation for the project and the present Congress government is keen on constructing the dam brushing aside objections raised by the Tamil Nadu government. The case is also pending before the Supreme Court.
In all these three cases, Tamil Nadu, being the lower riparian state is in the disadvantageous position by denial of its legitimate share of water on account of the protraction of the disputes while the neighbouring states of Karnataka, Kerala and Andhra Pradesh are in advantage by the status quo. So, Chandrababu Naidu’s suggestion for a debate on, or the decision of all parties in Andhra for seeking a law for, the rights of lower riparian states will be well received in Tamil Nadu.
No comments:
Post a Comment