Setting at rest the controversy over the safety of the 116-year-old Mullaperiyar dam, the Empowered Committee, headed by the former Chief Justice of India A.S. Anand, has said it is “structurally and hydrologically safe, and Tamil Nadu can raise the water level from 136 to 142 feet after carrying out certain repairs.”
In its report submitted to the Supreme Court on Wednesday, the committee is understood to have said: “The dam is seismically safe.” Last year's earth tremors in that region “did not have any impact on the Mullaperiyar dam and the Idukki reservoir and there was no danger to the safety of the two dams.”
The committee's conclusion is expected to bring relief to both Kerala and Tamil Nadu after apprehensions were raised on the Mullaperiyar dam's safety following mild tremors in that region. The committee gave its findings on the basis of the reports, studies and investigations conducted by various agencies constituted to go into the safety aspects. The committee was set up in February 2010 during the course of arguments on Tamil Nadu's suit questioning the law enacted by Kerala to restrict the water level in the dam to 136 ft.
On Kerala's demand for construction of a new dam, the Empowered Committee said that in view of the age of the existing reservoir, building a new one could be considered as an alternative proposal. If a new dam was constructed, the maximum water level (MWL) should be fixed at 155 ft and a fresh agreement signed between the two States on water sharing and maintenance.
Dissenting note
While Justice K.T. Thomas, retired Supreme Court judge representing Kerala on the committee, gave a dissenting note and said water level in the existing dam should not be raised above 136 feet, Justice A.R. Lakshmanan, retired Supreme Court judge representing Tamil Nadu, opposed the proposal for a new dam saying it was not necessary.
The committee framed five main issues: “Which strengthening measures as suggested by the CWC [Central Water Commission] have already been carried out by Tamil Nadu for the dam, each of the two: the main and baby dam components, to ensure its safety and stability based on the investigations so far carried out? Which remaining measures from amongst those suggested by the CWC are yet to be carried out by Tamil Nadu for the safety and stability of the dam and when will they be undertaken and completed? Should the reservoir level be raised from 136 ft.? If yes, what further measures for strengthening the existing dam do the two parties envisage to allow the raising of reservoir level to 142 ft. and beyond?”
Kerala proposed additional issues: “What are the needs of Tamil Nadu in the waters in the existing Mullaperiyar dam? Does Tamil Nadu suffer any injury, if the storage is not raised beyond 136 ft? Does the MWL go beyond 155 ft. submerging the lands which are not part of the Lease Deed of 1886? If so, to what extent? Will increase of storage beyond 136 ft. prejudicially affect the environment, ecology and biodiversity? Will the downstream Idukki dam collapse if the Mullaperiyar dam breaks? What will be the consequent loss of lives and property to both States?; What benefits would accrue to both States from the diversion of Periyar waters, under the alleged Lease Deed of 1886 and the supplemental agreements of 1970? Is Periyar an inter-State river?”
The Empowered Committee, which includes the former Secretary to the Ministry of Water Resources, C.D. Thatte, and the retired CWC Chief Engineer, D.K. Mehta, has answered all the issues in its 250-page report.
The case comes up for further hearing before a five-judge Constitution Bench on May 4.
Keywords: Mullaperiyar dam issue
This report will not solve the issue. It will defiantly restart the issue again because I think the report is 100% favourable to TN. Apart from the empower committee there are certain other reports are also is there(IIT Delhi), which says that the dam will collapse if there is an earth quick happen above 6 in Richter scale. The Court should consider that reports also.
The relationship that had been poisoned by the malayalees against the Tamils will take a long time to heal unlike the result of the panel, which had taken only a few months.
A long trusted relationship was broken and poisoned by the selfish interest of malayalee politicians and as a Tamil, I would have a hard time forgetting the Tamils against whom violence and outrage of modesty was committed by the malayalee hooligans during that period.
I do not find anything wrong in Tamil Nadu government argument. Kerala cannot indulge into affairs of other state dam with the only reason that the land in which it is there belongs to it.It has given the land on lease. Tamil Nadu gets electricity and water for livelihood from it and cannot afford to lose it just like that. The only reason which Kerala government gives for decommissioning the dam is that it is 116 years old. But the dams built years ago than the mullaiperiar dam remain safe. More over expert panel has suggested the dam safe which gas taken into seismic,hydrological,structural safety of the dam. If a new dam is built the height of dam as per supreme court panel is 155 ft. Will Kerala agree to it?
The report is quite expected as the Panel members were supporting TN from the beginning. TN was trying it best to make the reports favourable to it. They don't expect that the 116 years old Dam will not collapse. We cannot change destiny. But destiny of the people has to decide by the rulling Govt. What Kerala Govt can do is to make protective Dam down stream at least people around the area can sleep properly.
The reaction of a section of people supporting Kerala's stand is on
expected lines and hence not surprising. However, some of the
comments by few readers are puzzling and bizzare. To answer the point
raised by Mr. VK Guptan, leave alone Ernakulam...earth quake can strike this very moment while i am typing this mail and can bring the entire building on me. In our daily lives, we seek professional help for routine problems-we visit a doctor for health problem, a lawyer for legal issues. We seek their help because simply they are
qualified to do those jobs. So we may or may not be in emotional agreement with the findings of the panel. However least we can do is to respect the wisdom of the panel, place trust in them and move on ith our lives. Further, as a suggestion supreme court could appoint similar panels in future to review the safety of the dam, say every 5-10 years and recommend suggestive measures.
Science doesn't listen to the number years. There some scientific
parameters that are used. The following arguments are mute.. so please
stop posting them!
1) "It is 116 years old"
2) "If you need a repair then why raise the level"
3) "who will guarantee there will no earthquake"
The only way one can argue is by poking holes at the method used for reaching the conclusions.
The Indus river basin disputes between India and Pakistan got almost settled except for some minor disputes in all these 60 years. There is a treaty governing sharing of waters and also a role for a neutral arbitrator to play if called upon. When, two independent countries can go ahead with that treaty in operation, it is rather amusing to observe that two neighbouring states in India fighting for sharing waters and raising relevant and irrelevant questions, the past 20 years and more. Brotherhood relations between states are missing and what a sorry state of affairs.
The Indus river basin disputes between India and Pakistan got almost settled except for some minor disputes in all these 60 years. There is a treaty governing sharing of waters and also a role for a neutral arbitrator to play if called upon. When, two independent countries can go ahead with that treaty in operation, it is rather amusing to observe that two neighbouring states in India fighting for sharing waters and raising relevant and irrelevant questions, the past 20 years and more. Brotherhood relations between states are missing and what a sorry state of affairs.
Who will guarantee that there will not be any earthquake of such
strength at Idukki dam site that it can destroy it in a matter of
seconds and the whole water will not flow out and wipe out Ernakulam
district? Who can guarantee that there will not be an earth quake in
Arabian sea and the tsunami waves generated will not wipe out 30
kilometers of Kerala coast line? Why Supreme Court should expect
something which is not likely to happen?
Mullaperiyar dam structurally & hydrologically safe then this is the time to raise the level to 146 ft.
A historical judgement and the interest of the both Kerala and Tamil Nadu have been kept in mind while writing the final order of the Commission.
But the different views taken by both Justice [retd] Laxmanan representing Tamil Nadu and Justice [retd] K.T.Thomas representing Kerala are not in the best interest of the both state people.
Now the both State Chief Ministers should come together
and should act carefully so that both State people can live peacefully like brothers and sisters who has the cultural & historical links.
It was a mistake on the part of Kerala to have framed the whole issue as primarily that of safety. The fundamental issue is that it is a dispute over a water source. The assumption behind the demand to raise the water level is that the people of Kerala would not be adversely affected if more water from the river is diverted elsewhere. This is not true. If you have a river in a particular region, it would support a particular kind of vegetation, and particular kinds of livelihoods and lifestyles. Kerala has more rain and water bodies, and that is why the state is more densely populated (859 persons per sq.km. compared to TN's 555). Once you take the water away, there would be adverse effects on the geography, vegetation and population of the region. Moreover, Kerala needs water for drinking purposes, irrigation, power generation, for industries etc. The Kerala government has to be forthright about this instead of pretending that Kerala has "too much" water or anything of the sort.
Ridiculous. Irrespective of safety issues, it remains the case that Periyar is an intra-state river in Kerala, and not an inter-state river. Water from the river Periyar is not a "right" that Tamil Nadu can claim. It is for Kerala to assess its own requirements for domestic, agricultural and industrial uses and arrive upon the quantum of water it can give to Tamil Nadu. It is not for any outside body to decide what the water level should be. Whether there is a new dam or not, the treaty must be renegotiated, with provisions for the payment of adequate monetary compensation by Tamil Nadu and for the periodic revision of the compensation rates.
"structurally and hydrologically safe, and Tamil Nadu can raise the
water level from 136 to 142 feet after carrying out certain repairs" If
the dam needs repair to raise the water level. How do we say that the
dam is safe? I think, The Supreme Court should "also" look into
Alternative proposal of a new dam and have the construction to start as
soon as possible.
Atleast now, both TN and Kerala Governments should find ways to resolve the issues amicabaly as Panel also indicated that Kerala can build new dam. This controversy unnecessarily led to hatred feelings between Tamils and Keralites, otherwise known for friends for thousands of years.
At last the controversies are put at rest with proper technical inspections and critical evaluation. I hope here after the politicians of both the states take a refined thinking on this matter.Hope good sense will prevail upon both the state people not to discuss again this issue unnecessarily.
This should hopefully put rest to the rumor mongering that the dam is about to break or is structurally weak.
This will not settle the issue. Kerala has already put other queries.
Experts had time again asserted the safety of the dam but Kerala was
quoting some others and disputing the case. The behaviour of Kerala is
cantankerous to say the least. If Centre does not tell enough is
enough and put Kerala in its position the obstructive attitude will
continue. Already Tamilnadu has complained that Kerala Government is
not allowing it to do necessary maintenance. Supreme Court should warn
Kerala if any obstructional tactics are brought it will be considered
as contempt of court and punish the Kerala Government sternly. The
basic fact for the objection is that many of the big wigs one of the
major partners of the present UDF ministry had occupied vast tracts of
forest land and it will be submerged if water level is increased to
142 feet or above.
If supreme court believes that the water level of mullaperiar dam can be raised from 136 ft. to 142 ft., then the court must also come out with alternate solution as to what will be the compensatory stand of tamilnadu government and government of India incase there is loss to life and property of people effected by the damage to dam. Supreme court is supposed to play a neutral stand for the welfare of all Indians when it comes to verdict in conflicts so that all are assured of true and refined justice from the supremo.
So, I think supreme court must clarify till when, mullaperiar dam is strructurally and hrdrologically safe to be concervative.
Thanks to panel for considering facts pertaining to structural stability
of the dam and arriving at the decision and not going by popular
sentiments. So much of hate and fear psychosis was projected in social
media - almost getting a view that the dam would collapse the moment an
ant burps.
Balancing the Need. Internal opinions by so-called experts will be biased considering their political affiliations. Judges are not blind as we are led to believe when they make their decisions. They can be influenced by personal or political agenda. Kerala should bring an International Panel to investigate the pros and cons of keeping the existing dam to get an independent opinion on the quality of the existing dam. Kerala has expressed its commitment to give Tamil Nadu the existing share of water and logically, that should pave the way for the construction of a new dam. Corrupt political practices are a bane of our Nation. Kerala should strengthen its Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations so that expansion or re-construction of the dam will meet those requirements. Impacts to flora and fauna, economic and human impacts, hydro-geological impacts, etc., should be central to such studies.
This is a much discussed topic. But I simply cannot understand why a 116 year old dam is considered safe and what is the shelf life that the empowered committee deems that the dam is safe. With no mention of it, aren't we going in circles? 10-30 years from now, won't the same issue crop up again? Where is the long term plan. When you say the dam is safe, the least they should provide is a shelf life after which a new dam should be constructed. A dam cannot be created in one day. It needs long term planning. If the committe says that the dam is safe for 30 years, then so be it. But plans should be made to create a new dam, so that after 30 years, the old one can be decommisioned without affecting the water supply to tamil nadu. On a different note, isn't it time to update the lease agreement to match the time that the committe says the dam is safe?
We wish for a cordial relationship to develope following this report/ None should develop any sort of winner or loser feeling. Thank God
Please Email the Editor