K'taka didn't provide proof on water needs: Mahadayi tribunal

Picks several holes in state's plea for 7.56 tmcft water

While rejecting the interim application filed by Karnataka seeking permission to utilise 7.56 tmc feet of water from the Mahadayi river, the Mahadayi Water Disputes Tribunal on Wednesday picked several holes in the state’s application.

The Tribunal headed by Justice J M Panchal in its detailed order pointed out several faults in Karnataka’s application and observed that the state failed to provide required documentary evidence on water requirement and its utilisation.

Though Karnataka has prepared a preliminary report on the proposal for utilising seven tmc feet of water, the state has not submitted any detailed project report  or technical feasibility study of the project to it, the Tribunal said.

On the state’s contention that the Malaprabha basin is a perennially drought-hit region, the Tribunal observed that “inflow to the reservoir has been identified as one of the key indicators for drought. However, Karnataka has not placed any documents which mention about the policy or approved practice of Karnataka or that of Government of India related to use of inflow as an index of drought.”

On Karnataka’s arguments that there is surplus water in the Mahadayi, the Tribunal said “it is well known that there are considerable variations in rainfall and consequently in water availability from time to time as also from one place to another. The contribution to the total projected surplus water from catchments upto the three proposed locations for lifting of 7.56 tmc feet of water is more relevant. The projection of surplus water in respect of the whole basin will not be a correct indicator for planning of diversion”.

Though Karnataka promised that it will not create any permanent structure to lift water from the Mahadayi to transfer it to the Malaprabha basin, the Tribunal in its 119-page order observed that in the absence of deep concrete volutes and sumps or bunds, neither water can be lifted nor transported.

On the state’s suggestion to transfer of water only when there is shortfall of rain in a month, the Tribunal said the status of actual inflow in a particular month and determination whether it is less than normal or not will be known only at the end of the month and not at the beginning of the month.

Though Karnataka had completed construction work on the inter-connecting canal between the Mahadayi basin and the Malaprabha basin for diversion of water, the Tribunal said the State had not obtained any permission for that.