Cauvery: Cong moves resolution in K'taka Council
Bangalore, Mar 15: The main Opposition Congress in the Karnataka Legislative Council moved a resolution opposing the final verdict of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal and urging the State Government to continue both legal and constitutional battle to get justice for the state farmers. Moving the resolution, Leader of the Opposition H K Patil charged the Tribunal with failing to adopt a need-based approach while delivering the verdict.
While Karnataka, which contributed over 54 per cent of water to Cauvery, was allocated only 36 per cent of water, Tamil Nadu got 56.6 per cent of water as against its contribution of 31.9 per cent. The Tribunal had also not considered the 21,870 sqkm of drought prone areas in Karnataka as against Tamil Nadu's 12,790 sqkm. It had also totally ignored the drinking water needs of Bangalore, holding that it did not come under the basin area. However, eventhough Chennai did not come under Krishna basin, the city's water requirement was met by allotting five tmc of water from the shares of Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, he noted.
Accusing that Tamil Nadu had always adopted a big brotherly attitude towards Karnataka in the Cauvery issue, he reminded that Tamil Nadu did not accept the 1914 adjudication of an inquiry team and forced the then princely State of Mysore for the 1924 agreement, which was against the interests of Karnataka farmers.
Mr Patil urged the State Government to look for alternative solutions to mitigate the problems of the State farmers. If the award was implemented, 29 ongoing irrigation projects in Mysore, Chamarajanagar, Mandya and Bangalore Rural districts would suffer.
Earlier, the House witnessed stormy scenes when the Congress members took exception to the State Government maintaining stoic silence on the Cauvery issue.
JD(U) member Basavaraj Bommai, criticising the State Government, asked the Governments both at the Centre and the State not to consider the peaceful agitation by the people as a weakness.
When Mr Patil sought to move the motion, Higher Education Minister D H Shankaramurthy opposed it and said the Government was not hesitant to discuss the issue. JD(U) member Dr M P Nadagouda suggested that the Government move such a resolution.
Mr Sachidananda Khot, who was in the Chair, adjourned the House for some time to enable the members to sort out the issue in his chamber. When the House re-assembled, Parliamentary Affairs Minister M P Prakash said the Government had no objection in discussing the issue.