The malady afflicting the irrigation sector in Karnataka is basically two-fold. First, it did not have a visionary leader who would have freed irrigation of partisan politics and planned systematically to harness potential to get rid of the ‘drought-prone’ tag that has stuck to Karnataka. Second, the absence of what is known as ‘irrigation culture’ that one finds in Tamil Nadu and undivided Andhra Pradesh has made matters worse.
Of all the chief ministers in the past six decades since the formation of the new state, S Nijalingappa was the only one to chant the mantra of utilisation of river water potential for speedier economic development.But none listened to him.
For others, the portfolio of irrigation was more about extending political patronage than a tool for expeditious development of the state. As a result, the portfolio was mostly handled by low-profile ministers, who could not understand its nuances and take proper steps to ensure the state’s legitimate share of Krishna and Cauvery river waters.
The baggage of problems that the new state of Karnataka inherited remained almost unattended. When the state was formed in 1956, the Krishna basin in different administrative units like Bombay Presidency (three of the four districts of Bombay Karnataka), Madras Presidency (Ballari), erstwhile princely states of Hyderabad (Raichur and Kalaburagi) and Mysore (Old Mysore region) came together for the first time, with each administrative unit drawing up its own plans.
All of them needed to be dovetailed into a comprehensive plan, loose ends tied up and new problems studied and attended to. And the state had to be prepared for long-drawn future battles for its legitimate share in the Krishna and Cauvery waters.
Karnataka was singularly unprepared to cope with the enormity of the follow-up actions required to be taken on the Krishna and Cauvery fronts.
For example, the then Bombay government had planned to bring Krishna waters to Bijapur district as part of the Koyna hydroelectric scheme. With the reorganisation of states, Bijapur (now Vijayapura) district became part of Karnataka.
The Bombay government wanted Karnataka’s contribution to undertake the Bijapur part of the scheme. When Karnataka maintained a studied silence even after being sent reminders, Bombay quietly dropped the Bijapur part of the scheme and went ahead with its own plans.
As a result, Bijapur’s dreams of getting Krishna waters remain unfulfilled even today. The Ghataprabha project on which work had been started before the reorganisation of states remained in limbo till the 1990s.
In the first award of Krishna water share in 1966, the tribunal allocated 734 tmcft to Karnataka, pending a final award to be given later. Twenty years after the Bachawat award, another tribunal was constituted by the Union government for determining final allocation. It awarded an additional 100 tmcft of water to Karnataka, but it has not been able to fully utilise water initially allocated.
According to reports, Karnataka has utilised only 500-550 tmcft of its share. Till Karnataka fully utilises its full quota, Andhra Pradesh will get all the unutilised water flowing down the Krishna river.
In the case of Cauvery, it is still a mystery why Karnataka did not demand its due share when the 1924 agreement expired in 1974. It was for Karnataka to open the issue on the ground that it was not bound by the previous agreement (1924), entered into by the princely state of Mysore and the British government in India. But it did not.
The Mahadayi dispute with Goa is a minor affair compared to the other two. The state government, for its own reasons, has not averred that the water is required for the farmers of Malaprabha. It continues to maintain that additional water from the Mahadayi is required to meet the drinking water requirements of Hubballi, which is basically untenable since none from Hubballi-Dharwad has made any such demand. The agitation is carried out by only the farmers of Malaprabha command area.
Mathihalli Madan Mohan
Senior journalist and columnist based in Hubballi
