CWDT reserves its order on Cauvery Water Dispute

New Delhi, July 27: The Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal today reserved order acknowledging that the parties had concluded their arguments.

A three-line order signed by Chairman and the two members said, "arguments of the parties have already been concluded on April 21, 2004. The order in respect of report/decision under section 5 (2) of the Inter State Water Disputes Act 1956 is reserved.'' Two members Justice N S Rao and Justice Sudhir Narain passed a separate order stating that the question/occasion for supplying copies to the parties of any note/reports regarding the ground water does not arise in view of the clarifications issued by the Assessors that there was apparently no directions from the Tribunal to prepare any comprehensive report on the subject of surface or ground water.

After taking a defiant stand and releasing the Assessors report for comments and cross-comments of the parties to the dispute, the two members have obviously rescinded their earlier order ruling out supplying any copies of the Assessors reports in view of the Assessors' clarification.

Chairman of the CWDT Justice N P Singh had contended that there are no notes/reports of the Assessors with the Commission which was contested and overuled by the two Members. He also contended that the notes/reports or discussions held with the Assessors were all part of the final report and its disclosure to the parties would tantamount to disclosing the contents of the report itself whereas the Members took the stand that the Assessors reports were of advisory nature and hence not final. Besides, the Commission had powers to overrule it.

The CWDT constituted in June 1990 passed an Interim Order in June 1991 directing Karnataka to ensure 205 tmc at Mettur in Tamil Nadu and limiting Karnataka to restrict its irrigation to 11.2 lakh acres in the Cauvery basin.

The CWDT's term is to expire on August six and the Tribunal has sought extension of its term by six months. "We are likely to extend the term before that time", a senior official in the Water Resources Ministry told UNI.

There is also dispute between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu about the availability of water. Karnataka contends that it is 834 tmc while Tamil Nadu contends the figure is 670 tmc at 70 per cent dependability. Karnataka wants the 150 tmc of ground water in the delta region and north of Coleroon area in Tamil Nadu to be taken into account. Now that the CWDT has refused to make the Assessors report concerning Group 3 issues, Karnataka is studying the legal implications of the latest order. Further action if necessary would be taken after the return of F S Nariman, Senior Karnataka Counsel, Mr Mohan Katarki said.

In a three page order Mr Sudhir Narain and N S Rao passed a separate verdict clarifying that the question of supplying copies to the parties in the dispute or any note/reports regarding ground water and surface water does not arise. The order stated that the Assessors in their reply dated June 20, 2006 had stated that the 'it appears' that the Tribunal did not direct them to prepare any comprehensive report on the issue of ground water or surfacewater nor there was any occasion for them to initiate and circulate any report to the CWDT Chairman and Members after conclusion of arguments on February 11, 2004.

''In view of the above clarification made by learned Assessors, the question/occasion for supplying copies to the parties of any note/reports regarding ground water and surface water does not arise,'' they daid.

They also justified passing of the separate order under section 5 (2) of the ISWDA, 1956.

Recalling the April 21 orders organising a committee of experts to go into the issue, the members said that Tamil Nadu submitted that it had filed relevant documents and the Committee of experts would indefinitely delay the proceedings. Similarly Kerala and Pondicherry, too had felt that such a Committee would delay the final adjudication. Karnataka who has major stakes in the dispute, too had raised the same objection and stated that the Tribunal was investigating on adversarial basis for arriving at the adjudication and appointment of experts committee would reopen the proceedings on a different basis.

The Members said that the CWDT's May 10 Order asking the copies of the notes/reports of learned Assessors with regard to Group 3 issues be supplied to the party states. The states have filed their comments/cross comments on the Assessors reports. Karnataka in its comments relating to equitable apportionment of Cauvery waters had stated that issues regarding ground and surface water covered by Group 2 were also technical in nature and the notes/reports and the parties to the dispute were entitled to the copies of the Assessors submitted to the Chairman and the Members.

After this the Tribunal had sought the views of the Assessors on July 14, 2006 if any surface and ground water have been submitted by them to the Chairman or the Members.

The CWDT was constituted on June 2, 1990 following the directions by the Supreme Court in May 1990 on a petition filed by Tanjavur Delta Farmers of Tamil Nadu. The dispute also happens to the oldest dispute of the world dating back to 1803 resulting in the British rulers enforcing two agreements between Madras Presidency and Maharaja of Mysore in 1892 and 1924. Very few are aware of the fate of the first adjudication and report of by Justice H D Griffin of Allahabad High Court in 1914.

Karnataka Counsel Mohan V Katarki said that the legal team of Karnataka was studying the implications of the orders of the two Members disclosing that the Assessors had not given any report on surface and ground water and further action would be taken after the return of Senior Counsel F S Nariman who was on a tour abroad.

UNI