Sharing Krishna's bounty

All parties must learn to give and take

All river water-sharing awards invite controversy. So, the varied reaction to the ruling given by the second Krishna water disputes tribunal, headed by Justice Brijesh Kumar Mishra, is not surprising. But what sets it apart from most other river water awards is that all the three main contending states (Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh) have found something positive in it, though some concerns have been expressed against the award in Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra. The four-decade-old dispute pertained essentially to sharing of 448 thousand million cubic (TMC) feet of surplus water of the river Krishna, over and above the existing quotas of these states fixed by the first Krishna water disputes tribunal, headed by Justice R S Bachawat in 1969. The present tribunal has allocated the largest share of 190 TMC feet of water to Andhra Pradesh, followed by 177 TCM feet to Karnataka and 81 TCM feet to Maharashtra. The noteworthy point is that it has permitted Karnataka to raise the height of the Almatti dam over this river in its Bijapur district by five metres to facilitate higher water storage.

 

Though, Andhra Pradesh can derive satisfaction from the fact that it has been given a lion’s share of the waters allocated, the award can also potentially pose some problems for the state. Impounding of more water in the Almatti dam, after the height is increased, may impact the ongoing projects in the Krishna basin, particularly in the Rayalaseema region. Power generation potential of Srisailam and Nagarjunasagar may also come under strain. This apart, the tribunal’s verdict that Karnataka must release 8 to 10 TMC feet of Andhra Pradesh’s share of water from Almatti in the months of June and July for farm operations may prove inadequate to meet the stated objective. Indeed, such a low level for mandated water releases during the period when the monsoon has normally already set in defies logic. Karnataka would surely not mind releasing even higher amounts of water when the inflows are copious. While Andhra Pradesh’s response so far has been mature, despite the state losing the “right” to surplus water, the award has the potential to create a new wave of resentment in the state that political parties are wont to exploit.

Maharashtra, on the other hand, is worried on another count. The extension of Almatti dam might make some areas in Satara and Sangli districts of Maharashtra flood-prone. However, on the whole, there are more pros than cons of this award for the state. The enhanced overall entitlement of Krishna water, after the allotment of additional quota of the surplus water, will enable it to augment irrigation and generate more power from its Koyna dam. The ball is now in the Centre’s court since it must ensure implementation of the award. The tribunal has directed the Centre to set up Krishna water implementation board after the mandatory three months for parties to review and understand the award are over. Hopefully, this award will meet with better fate than other similar water-sharing awards, including for the Cauvery, which have all been mired in controversy.