<<–2/”>a >span style=”color: #ff0000;”>Note: READ id our New Initiative to cover two Topics (Weekly) of Current Importance in Detail with Specific focus on Prelims and Mains Exam

Table of Contents

After Cauvery: A look at other inter-state water tussles

The Supreme Court on February 16 delivered its verdict on Cauvery River Water Sharing between Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala, and Puducherry, bringing an end to a decade-old case. However, the dispute can be considered settled only when the Cauvery Management Board comes into effect and the three States and the Union Territory amicably share the water among themselves even during stressful times such as a drought.

The Cauvery dispute is just one among several inter-state river disputes in India. States have been fighting against each other for their ‘rightful’ share of water since the first Reorganisation of States after Independence. An Inter-State River Water Disputes Actwas enacted in 1956 to give powers to the Union Government to intervene in disputes surrounding inter-state rivers. It was amended in 2002 and a Bill to further amend the Act to create a Disputes Resolution Committee to look at all inter-state water disputes is pending.

Harnessing river water being a State subject, the riparian States are expected to solve issues among themselves. The Centre intervenes, setting up a tribunal, only when the talks fail.

Krishna River case

The first-ever Tribunal for a river dispute was formed in 1969 after Maharashtra, Karnataka, and Andhra Pradesh failed to come up with a formula to share the Krishna water.

The tribunal allocated 560 tmcft of Krishna water to Maharashtra, the State where the river originates. Karnataka was granted 700 tmcft, out of which 173 tmcft was for the Upper Karnataka Irrigation project in the Hyderabad-Karnataka region. Andhra Pradesh was granted 800 tmcft and was also given the Liberty to use surplus water, if any. The tribunal’s order was notified three years later.

Thirty years later, the three riparian States decided to review the order. A second tribunal was constituted in 2004

It gave its verdict in 2010. Accordingly, Maharashtra was to receive 666 tmcft of water, Karnataka 911 tmcft, and Andhra Pradesh 1001 tmcft. The tribunal suggested the setting up of the Krishna Basin Authority to protect the basin, especially after large-scale exploitation of groundwater was detected.

Unhappy with the verdict, Andhra Pradesh sought a re-examination. In 2013, the final order was issued where Andhra Pradesh would get 811 tmcft with the freedom to use 227.5 tmcft of surplus water. Karnataka got an additional allocation of 105 tmcft and Maharashtra would receive 35 tmcft of assured additional allocation. Andhra Pradesh moved the Supreme Court against the tribunal’s decision.

Godavari case

The dispute over Godavari river between Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Odisha, and Karnataka over the sharing of the Godavari river water. An MoU was already in place between the then Madras, Bombay and Hyderabad States and Madhya Pradesh. A fresh arrangement was necessitated after states were re-organised on a linguistic basis. The Bachawat Tribunal gave its final award in 1980.
Accordingly, each State was free to utilise the flow in Godavari and its tributaries up to a certain level. Thus Andhra Pradesh, the downstream state, decided to divert 80 tmcft of Godavari water from Polavaram to Krishna river, upstream of Vijayawada Anicut, so that it could be shared with Karnataka and Maharashtra. The Krishna-Godavari linking also gave rise to a national discussion on the inter-linking of
The Inchampalli Project too was started as a joint venture between Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, and Andhra Pradesh. When Chhattisgarh was carved out, it took over the project from Madhya Pradesh.
Once Telangana came into existence in 2014, the Godavari water and, more specifically, the Polavaram project became the bone of contention between the Telugu-speaking States. While the project will take care of the irrigation needs of the Godavari districts of Andhra Pradesh, Telangana feared it would submerge many villages in its Khammam district. Odisha too has expressed its reservations over the dam’s design.

Narmada Case – Dispute over a dam

The Narmada Water Dispute Tribunal was also constituted around the same time as the Krishna and Godavari Tribunals. Headed by Justice V. Ramaswami, the tribunal gave its award in December 1976.
Accordingly, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, and Rajasthan were allotted 9, 18.25, 0.25, and 0.50 Million Acre-Feet per year (MAF/year). The tribunal determined that the height of the Sardar Sarovar Dam should be fixed at 455 feet. It also approved the Indira Sagar project in Madhya Pradesh. Though the tribunal award was not disputed per se, differences arose over compensation and rehabilitation due to the construction of canal and power projects. The Sardar Sarovar project, for instance, ran into multiple controversies and was finally inaugurated last September, almost 56 years after the foundation stone was laid.

Ravi and Beas Case An inter-country dispute

Ravi and Beas flow through Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan before merging with Indus in Pakistan. According to the Indus Water Treaty signed between India and Pakistan in 1960, the two rivers along with Sutlej are to be controlled by India.
The Ravi & Beas Waters Tribunal was constituted in 1986. A year later, the tribunal allocated the waters between Punjab and Haryana in the ratio of 1.3:1. While all States involved sought clarifications over the details of the report, the Central government is yet to reply. The order was never notified.
Meanwhile, Punjab enacted the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act in 2004 to terminate all agreements relating to the sharing of the waters of Ravi and Beas. The Union government filed a Presidential Reference before the Supreme Court on the constitutional validity of such an Act. In 2016, the Supreme Court opined that the Act was not in accordance with the Constitution, but the matter is still sub judice.

Vamsdhara Case Of floods and diversion

Vamsadhara originates from the Eastern Ghats near Lanjigarh of Kalahandi district in Odisha and reaches the Bay of Bengal at Kalingapatnam in Andhra Pradesh. While both States agreed to utilise the water on a 50:50 basis, trouble brew when Andhra Pradesh began constructing a flood flow canal at Katragada. Odisha feared that the canal would dry up the river bed and deplete the groundwater.
In 1961, Andhra Pradesh had proposed a barrage at Neradi, entailing the acquisition of 106 acres of land in Odisha territory. Odisha refused to entertain the Neradi plea after Andhra Pradesh proceeded with the Katragada project. Andhra Pradesh, on its part, claimed Odisha was diverting Vamsadhara waters to the Rushikulya river basin by building the Harabhangi dam.
A tribunal was set up in 2010, headed by Justice Mukundakam Sharma. In September 2017, the Tribunal gave its final orderby allowing Andhra Pradesh to complete the barrages and set up a supervisory committee comprising representatives from both States and the Central Water Commission.

Mahadayi Case – A river with two names

The Mahadayi is a relatively small river with a total length of 80.8km. It originates in the Belagavi district of Karnataka, briefly passes through Maharashtra and flows through Goa (where its known as Mandovi), and drains to the Arabian Sea.
Since the eighties, Karantaka has been was contemplating linking of Mahadayi with Malaprabha river, a tributary of Krishna. In 2002, Karnataka gave the idea a shape in the form of the Kalasa-Bhanduri project, whose goal was to divert the excess waters of the Mahadayi into the Malaprabha basin, in the process benefiting northern Karnataka. Goa strongly opposed it as Mahadayi is one of the two rivers the State is dependent on. The Mahadayi Water Disputes Tribunal was set up in 2010 and a final award is yet to be given.

Mahanadi case – Two States and a dam

Mahanadi was famously known as the “sorrow of Odisha” for its devastating floods. The sobriquet vanished after the construction of the Hirakud Dam, which not only solved the problem of constant floods but also transformed the silt-ridden Sambalpur region into a fertile land. Mahanadi originates in the Chhattisgarh plains and flows through northern Odisha to reach the Bay of Bengal by forming several distributaries. Odisha and Chhattisgarh are at loggerheads over the sharing of Mahanadi water. Odisha has repeatedly claimed that Chhattisgarh either blocks or excessively releases water from its Kalma barrage without prior intimation. Odisha approached the Supreme Court in 2016 as Chhattisgarh decided to construct weirs in upstream of Mahanadi. The Union Cabinet on February 20 approved setting up a tribunal to resolve the Mahanadi dispute.

River Linking in Rajasthan

Rajasthan set to begin work on its first river-linking project

Rajasthan has kicked off preparations for its first river-interlinking project – ensuring flow of excess rainwater in Chambal and Brahmani rivers to Bisalpur dam – to meet drinking water and irrigation requirements.
Once operational, the project will ensure smooth drinking water supply to 19 towns and around 3000 villages in Jaipur, Ajmer, Tonk and Nagaur districts.
The project, once approved, will cost around ₹6000 crore and take five to seven years to complete.

The recommended works are :

Construction of a dam to store monsoon flows in Brahmani river;

A diversion system to take water from the Brahmani dam to Bisalpur dam;

A pump house to lift water from Jawahar Sagar dam on the Chambal river;

A transmission system to bring water from Jawahar Sagar dam to diversion system and Brahmani dam.

Eastern Canal Project to link three rivers in Rajasthan

An Eastern Rajasthan Canal Project, to be taken up shortly at a cost of Rs. 40,000 crore, will link the Kalisindh, Gambhiri and Parvati rivers and solve the drinking water problem in 13 districts.

Interlinking of rivers is a proposal to link rivers in India through a Network of canals and reservoirs. The objective is to improve water management and irrigation, and to reduce floods and droughts.

The idea of interlinking of rivers has been around for centuries. The first recorded proposal was made by the British engineer Sir Arthur Cotton in the 1850s. However, it was not until the 1970s that the Indian government seriously considered the proposal.

The main objectives of interlinking of rivers are to:

Improve water management: Interlinking of rivers will help to improve water management in India. By linking rivers, it will be possible to transfer water from areas with surplus water to areas with deficit water. This will help to ensure that all parts of the country have access to adequate water for irrigation, drinking, and other purposes.
Reduce floods and droughts: Interlinking of rivers will also help to reduce the impact of floods and droughts. By linking rivers, it will be possible to store water during the monsoon season and release it during the dry season. This will help to prevent floods and droughts.

There are many potential benefits of interlinking of rivers. These include:

Increased irrigation: Interlinking of rivers will help to increase irrigation in India. By linking rivers, it will be possible to bring more land under irrigation. This will help to increase agricultural production and improve Food Security.
Increased hydropower generation: Interlinking of rivers will also help to increase hydropower generation in India. By linking rivers, it will be possible to build more Dams and hydroelectric power Plants. This will help to meet the growing demand for electricity in India.
Reduced floods and droughts: As mentioned above, interlinking of rivers will help to reduce the impact of floods and droughts. This will help to protect lives and property and reduce the economic losses caused by floods and droughts.

However, there are also some challenges associated with interlinking of rivers. These include:

Cost: Interlinking of rivers is a very expensive project. The estimated cost of the project is over \$1 trillion. This is a huge amount of Money, and it is not clear how the government will finance the project.
Environmental impact: Interlinking of rivers will have a significant environmental impact. The construction of dams and canals will disrupt the flow of rivers and could lead to the loss of Biodiversity-2/”>Biodiversity.
Social impact: Interlinking of rivers will also have a significant social impact. The displacement of people and the loss of livelihoods are some of the potential social impacts of the project.
Economic impact: The economic impact of interlinking of rivers is also uncertain. Some experts believe that the project will have a positive economic impact, while others believe that it will have a negative economic impact.

Interlinking of rivers is a complex and controversial project. There are many potential benefits and challenges associated with the project. It is important to carefully consider all of the factors before making a decision about whether or not to proceed with the project.

Interlinking of rivers is a proposal to link rivers in India through a network of canals and reservoirs. The aim is to improve water management and irrigation, and to reduce flooding.

The proposal has been controversial, with some people arguing that it is too expensive and environmentally damaging. Others argue that it is essential to meet the growing water needs of India’s Population.

Here are some frequently asked questions about interlinking of rivers:

What is interlinking of rivers?

Interlinking of rivers is a proposal to link rivers in India through a network of canals and reservoirs. The aim is to improve water management and irrigation, and to reduce flooding.

Why is interlinking of rivers being proposed?

The proposal is being made to improve water management and irrigation in India. India is a water-scarce country, and interlinking of rivers could help to improve the distribution of water. It could also help to reduce flooding.

What are the benefits of interlinking of rivers?

The benefits of interlinking of rivers include:

Improved water management: Interlinking of rivers could help to improve the distribution of water in India. This would help to meet the growing water needs of the country’s population.
Reduced flooding: Interlinking of rivers could help to reduce flooding in India. This would be achieved by storing water in reservoirs and releasing it slowly during periods of heavy rainfall.
Increased irrigation: Interlinking of rivers could help to increase irrigation in India. This would be achieved by providing water to areas that are currently not irrigated.
Increased hydropower generation: Interlinking of rivers could help to increase hydropower generation in India. This would be achieved by building dams on the rivers that are being linked.
What are the costs of interlinking of rivers?

The costs of interlinking of rivers include:

The cost of building the canals and reservoirs: This would be a significant cost.
The cost of environmental damage: Interlinking of rivers could have a negative impact on the Environment. This could include the loss of biodiversity and the disruption of river flows.
The cost of social disruption: Interlinking of rivers could have a negative impact on people who live in the areas that are being affected. This could include the displacement of people and the loss of livelihoods.
What are the alternatives to interlinking of rivers?

There are a number of alternatives to interlinking of rivers. These include:

Improving water management: This could be achieved through a number of measures, such as improving irrigation efficiency and using water more efficiently in Industry.
Reducing flooding: This could be achieved through a number of measures, such as building dams and reservoirs, and improving Drainage Systems.
Increasing irrigation: This could be achieved through a number of measures, such as building more dams and reservoirs, and improving irrigation efficiency.
Increasing hydropower generation: This could be achieved through a number of measures, such as building more dams and reservoirs.
What is the future of interlinking of rivers?

The future of interlinking of rivers is uncertain. The proposal has been controversial, and there is no clear consensus on whether it should be implemented. The decision will ultimately be made by the Indian government.

Interlinking of rivers is a project that aims to:
(A) Link rivers in different parts of the country to improve water management.
(B) Divert water from surplus rivers to deficit rivers.
(C) Increase the availability of water for irrigation, drinking, and industrial use.
(D) All of the above.
The main advantage of interlinking rivers is that it will:
(A) Increase the availability of water for irrigation, drinking, and industrial use.
(B) Reduce the risk of floods and droughts.
(C) Improve the water quality of rivers.
(D) All of the above.
The main disadvantage of interlinking rivers is that it will:
(A) Be very expensive to implement.
(B) Have a negative impact on the environment.
(C) Lead to social and political conflicts.
(D) All of the above.
The interlinking of rivers is a controversial issue because:
(A) It is a very expensive project.
(B) It has the potential to have a negative impact on the environment.
(C) It is likely to lead to social and political conflicts.
(D) All of the above.
The interlinking of rivers is a complex issue that needs to be carefully considered before any decisions are made. The following are some of the factors that need to be considered:
(A) The cost of the project.
(B) The potential environmental impact.
(C) The potential social and political impacts.
(D) All of the above.
The interlinking of rivers is a project that has been proposed for many years. However, it has not yet been implemented. The main reason for this is that:
(A) There is no consensus on whether the project is a good idea.
(B) The project is very expensive.
(C) There is a lack of political will to implement the project.
(D) All of the above.
The interlinking of rivers is a project that has the potential to have a significant impact on the environment. Some of the potential environmental impacts include:
(A) The loss of biodiversity.
(B) The degradation of water quality.
(C) The disruption of river flows.
(D) All of the above.
The interlinking of rivers is a project that has the potential to have a significant impact on Society. Some of the potential social impacts include:
(A) The displacement of people.
(B) The conflict between different groups of people.
(C) The loss of livelihoods.
(D) All of the above.
The interlinking of rivers is a project that has the potential to have a significant impact on politics. Some of the potential political impacts include:
(A) The increase in conflict between different states.
(B) The increase in the power of the central government.
(C) The decrease in the power of local governments.
(D) All of the above.
The interlinking of rivers is a complex issue that needs to be carefully considered before any decisions are made. The following are some of the questions that need to be answered:
(A) Is the project necessary?
(B) Is the project feasible?
(C) Is the project affordable?
(D) Is the project sustainable?
The interlinking of rivers is a project that has the potential to be a success. However, it is important to carefully consider all of the potential impacts before making a decision. The following are some of the factors that need to be considered:
(A) The cost of the project.
(B) The potential environmental impact.
(C) The potential social and political impacts.
(D) All of the above.