SC declines early hearing of TN's plea on Cauvery

April 28, 2012 09:22 am | Updated November 16, 2021 11:33 pm IST - New Delhi

The Supreme Court on Friday declined the Tamil Nadu government's plea seeking early listing of its application in the Cauvery case to restrain Karnataka from resorting to summer irrigation or drawing water from the four main reservoirs during summer.

A Bench of Justices D.K. Jain and Anil R. Dave told senior counsel for Tamil Nadu C.S. Vaidyanathan, when he pleaded for urgent hearing of the matter that it would not be possible for the court to take up the case before July. Justice Jain told Mr. Vaidyanathan that it would be taken up in July after the summer vacation. The application stated that on March 15, the storage in the four reservoirs had depleted and only about 20 to 30 tmcft would remain by the end of May, as against the full storage of 114.5 tmcft.

It said since Karnataka was depleting the storage from February to May for building up its storage from June to September, Tamil Nadu could not meet its irrigation requirement from June to September because of shortfall in inflow. Hence it wanted the court to pass a restraint order against Karnataka.

However, counsel Mohan Katarki, appearing for Karnataka, who said the only obligation arising from the final order of the Tribunal, was to make available 192 tmcft of water at Biligundlu in a normal year.

Disputing TN's stand he said: “The flows measured by the Central Water Commission at the inter-state border Biligundlu indicate that during the water years of 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11, the flows were 353 tmcft, 210 tmcft, 219 tmcft and 209 tmcft respectively. In the water year 2011-12, about 227 tmcft has been recorded as against 192 tmcft ordered by the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal by its Final Order dated February 5, 2007 in a normal year.”

Tamil Nadu also filed another application seeking a direction against the Union of India for publication of the award of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal dated February 5, 2007 under Sec.6(1) of the Inter State River Water Disputes Act, 1956. The Bench said both the applications would be heard in July.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.