Chennai, 26 May

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister C Joseph Vijay requested Prime Minister Narendra Modi to instruct officials concerned to reject the Detailed Project Report (DPR) prepared by the Karnataka government over the Mekedatu project, even as State Deputy Chief Minister DK Shivakumar said the government was in the process of filing the DPR.

In a letter to the PM, Vijay expressed surprise that the Ministry of Jal Shakti and the CWC had entertained Karnataka’s proposal for the dam without considering Tamil Nadu’s plea. He alleged that the project contravened the final award of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal and also the Supreme Court judgment, adding that the project was a "blatant violation of the existing environmental laws”.

"Tamil Nadu is of the firm view that by proposing a new Mekedatu Project with a storage capacity of 67.16 TMC just upstream of the Karnataka-Tamil Nadu border, Karnataka is attempting to prevent the flows generated in the uncontrolled catchment, one of the 3 components from which the flows are to be ensured to Tamil Nadu, according to… the Supreme Court," he stated.

The TVK leader noted that Shivakumar had recently said that Tamil Nadu had “no right” to object to the Mekedatu Balancing Reservoir. However, this had caused concern among lakhs of farmers in the Cauvery Delta in Tamil Nadu who depend on the river.

Vijay argued that the Mekedatu project was not among the schemes permitted by the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (CWDT) in its final award, which was later upheld by the Supreme Court in its 16 February 2018 judgment.

He said the Cauvery basin had already been classified as a deficit basin and the available water at 50 per cent dependability had been fully allocated among the basin states, leaving no scope for additional utilisation or creation of a major storage reservoir.

He further contended that any new project across the Cauvery or its tributaries, without approval under the Tribunal’s award, would amount to interference with the Supreme Court judgment.

Citing the Supreme Court ruling, he argued that an upper riparian state cannot take actions affecting scheduled water deliveries to lower riparian states, and therefore the proposed reservoir would violate the court’s directions.

However, Shivakumar, who also holds the Irrigation portfolio, said that Karnataka should be “thankful” that a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court had earlier dismissed a plea by the Tamil Nadu government against the balancing reservoir.