CHENNAI: Karnataka continues to remain defiant over construction of Mekedatu dam and refused to hold talks with Tamil Nadu to find "amicable solution", ignoring the directions of Union Environment Ministry.
The ministry's Expert Appraisal Committee for River Valley and Hydroelectric Projects held on July 19 had deferred Mekedatu project proposal saying amicable solution be arrived at between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu for granting of Terms of Reference (ToR). The project is a contentious issue between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu since Tamil Nadu fears the new dam would allow Karnataka release even lesser Cauvery water to the riparian state.
However, Cauvery Neeravari Nigama Limited (CNNL) in its reply on October 4 to the ministry categorically said: "The question of amicable solution does not arise since the project get qualified based on merits. Karnataka earnestly requests the Union Environment Ministry to approve the ToR at the earliest."
Chief engineer of CNNL said the Mekedatu dam project was very much essential to store the water and to regulate the releases to the Tamil Nadu as per the monthly schedule and also to meet the drinking water requirement of Bengaluru city and surrounding areas. This will be in consistent with the order of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal as modified by the Supreme Court.
"Karnataka can take up Mekedatu project on its own accord, while maintaining the requirements of the award. Excess flows over and above the stipulated releases at Biligundlu gauging station is resulting in substantial flows going waste into the sea which is evident from the flow data of last 45 years wherein, flows in excess of 177.25 TMC of water had flown in more than 30 years. The construction of Mekedatu
reservoir will help in storing the water in good monsoon so that the regulation can be met," the chief engineer said justifying the project.
Further, Karnataka said, as per Clause XIII and XVIII of tribunal award as modified by the Supreme Court on February 16, 2018, any hydro-power project constructed and Cauvery waters are stored in the reservoir, the pattern of downstream releases should be consistent with the tribunal order so that the irrigation requirements are not jeopardized.
There is nothing in the order of tribunal to impair the right or power or authority of any State to regulate within its boundaries the use of water, or to enjoy the benefit of waters within the State, if it is not inconsistent with the order, CNNL said in its reply.