VIJAYAWADA: Describing the demand of Telangana for a higher share in Krishna waters as irrelevant, the Andhra Pradesh government shot off another letter to the Krishna River Management Board (KRMB) requesting that 70:30 (AP:TS) ratio be considered for the current water year (2021-22) allocations. Engineer-in-chief (irrigation) C Narayana Reddy also informed the board that the arguments of Telangana in support of its demand for more water were “settled issues before the Krishna Water Dispute Tribunal (KWDT)” and hence it was not open for the neighbouring state to seek more water allocation.
The ENC pointed out that the KRMB has no jurisdiction for considering issues of allocation that are pending with KWDT-II. It may be noted that the board has included the issue of 50:50 sharing of water as requested by Telangana in the agenda of the upcoming full board meeting, which has been pushed to September 1 from August 27.
In the letter written on Wednesday, the ENC cited that the KWDT-I protected the utilisations under the projects to the erstwhile AP and held that the allocations made to the states were enbloc. He explained that the water was being shared as per the working arrangement mutually agreed — 66:34 ratio — by both the states since 2017. He complained that Telangana, which claimed to have used only 46 TMC out of the 89.15 TMC minor irrigation allocation, was utilising 175.54 TMC through restoration of 16,163 tanks and construction of 386 new minor irrigation tanks and check dams for irrigating 10.77 lakh ayacut under Mission Kakatiya.
The ENC explained that if the utilisation of about 175 TMC under minor irrigation is considered, then the share of Krishna waters for utilising under major and medium projects would be in the ratio of 20.12:79.88 for TS and AP respectively. “However, if Telangana restricts its utilisations under minor irrigation allocation of 89.15 TMC, then the share between the two states under major and medium irrigation projects would be 30:70 (TS:AP),” he observed.
For the record, the TS government had written to the KRMB seeking an ad hoc allocation of 50:50 as its rightful share would be 70.8:29.2 considering the parameters such as catchment area, cultivable area, drought prone area and population. TS argued that since its request for 711 TMC was put forth before the ongoing KWDT-II, equal share should be given until the tribunal finalises the allocation.
The ENC rebutted these arguments. Narayana contended that diversion of water outside the basin for irrigation was legal as KWDT-I did not propose to impose restrictions on AP for diversion. He pointed out that TS’ contention for 70.8:29.2 ratio in sharing based on basin parameters doesn’t hold any water as the KWDT held that there was no mechanical formula for equitable apportionment applicable to all rivers.
“...it is to inform that AP has also placed a demand for 1,059 TMC before the ongoing Tribunal which included projects mentioned in the Eleventh Schedule of the AP Reorganisation Act, 2014. It is pertinent to state that the issues being raised by Telangana in support of its entitlement for greater share (viz., basin parameter and restraining AP from outside basin diversion) are settled issues before the KWDT.
Regardless, the matter is pending with the KWDT-II and it is not open to Telangana to contend that it is entitled for a greater share merely on the basis that it has put forth higher demands before the KWDT-II,” Narayana said. “In view of the above, the TS’ proposal for sharing of water in the ratio 70.8:29,2 in Krishna River considering the basin parameters is irrelevant,” he added. The ENC also substantiated AP’s argument by recalling that the Union ministry of Jal Shakti, in the second Apex Council meeting held in October, 2020, held that the working arrangement as agreed by both the States shall continue.
KRMB HAS NO JURISDICTION ON PENDING ISSUE: ENC
The ENC said the KRMB has no jurisdiction for consideration of such issues which are pending before KWDT-II. The board can only regulate the water after allocations made by the tribunals. “Though the Tribunal did not prepare any operation protocol for common projects, the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh implemented the operation rules for Srisailam and Nagarjuna Sagar,” he said.