Why In News?

The Karnataka government set up a panel to monitor the Mekedatu Balancing Reservoir Project across the Cauvery. 

What Is The Mekedatu Project?

Mekedatu, meaning “goat’s leap” in Kannada, is a narrow gorge on the Cauvery near Kanakapura in Bengaluru South (Ramanagara) district. 

  • It lies about 3 km downstream of the Arkavathy–Cauvery confluence, close to the Tamil Nadu border.

  • Karnataka plans a concrete gravity dam with a gross storage of 67 TMC.

  • The project was estimated at ₹9,000 crore in 2018–19. Karnataka has since cited a cost of ₹16,745 crore.

Objectives

  • Drinking Water: The project would supply 4.75 TMC of drinking water to Bengaluru and nearby areas.

    • Free Mentorship Need Guidance for UPSC / WBCS / State PSC?
    100% Free & Confidential • Quick Callback

  • Hydropower: It would generate 400 MW of electricity.

  • Balancing Reservoir: Karnataka says the dam would regulate releases to Tamil Nadu at Biligundlu, especially in poor-rainfall years.

Why Is The Mekedatu Project Disputed?

Tamil Nadu’s Objections

  • Lower Riparian Concerns: Tamil Nadu argues that a new reservoir upstream would let Karnataka control the flow reaching its farmers in the Cauvery delta.

  • Legal Argument: Tamil Nadu holds that the project violates the 2007 Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal award and the 2018 Supreme Court verdict. It says no upper riparian state can build a reservoir without the lower riparian state’s consent.

  • Deficit Basin: Tamil Nadu describes the Cauvery as a deficit basin, where any new storage upstream will reduce flows downstream.

Karnataka’s Position

  • Within Its Share: Karnataka argues that Mekedatu will only use water already allotted to it, including the 4.75 TMC for Bengaluru’s drinking water.

  • Drinking Water Only: Karnataka states that the stored water will be used only for drinking and power, not for irrigation.

  • Self-Funded: Karnataka says it is funding the project entirely on its own.

What Is Cauvery Dispute?

It is a long-standing inter-state water-sharing conflict between Karnataka (the upper riparian state) and Tamil Nadu (the lower riparian state), with involvement from Kerala and the union territory of Puducherry. 

Origins of the Conflict

  • Colonial Agreements: The dispute traces back to agreements signed in 1892 and 1924 between the former Princely State of Mysore and the Madras Presidency.  

  • Post-Independence Issues: When the 1924 agreement expired in 1974, both states began scaling up irrigation and dam construction, leading to friction over how to divide the river's waters.  

  • The River's Path: The Cauvery River originates in Talakaveri in Kodagu, Karnataka, flows through Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, and empties into the Bay of Bengal. 

Current Water Allocations (2018 Supreme Court Verdict)

The Supreme Court declared the Cauvery River a national asset and finalized a revised annual water-sharing formula totaling 740 TMC (thousand million cubic feet) in normal years:   

  • Tamil Nadu: 404.25 TMC

  • Karnataka: 284.75 TMC

  • Kerala: 30 TMC

  • Puducherry: 7 TMC

  • Environmental & Flow Uses: 14 TMC  

Why Is Dispute Increasing?

  • Scarcity & Monsoons: The conflict routinely resurfaces during years when the southwest monsoon fails or rainfall is deficient in Kodagu. 

  • Competing Needs: Karnataka highlights the critical drinking water requirements of Bengaluru and its local agricultural needs, while Tamil Nadu demands assured releases to save its delta crops (such as the Kuruvai harvest). 

  • Governance Bodies: The Cauvery Water Management Authority (CWMA) and the Cauvery Water Regulation Committee (CWRC), set up in 2018 under the Ministry of Jal Shakti, monitor flows at the Billigundlu measuring site and pass release orders during crises.  

Framework To Address Inter-State-Water Dispute

  • Article 262: Parliament may make laws to adjudicate inter-state river water disputes, and may bar courts from hearing them.

  • Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956: The Act lets the Centre set up tribunals to settle water disputes between states.

  • Entry 17, State List: Water is a State subject, but this is subject to Entry 56 of the Union List, which covers regulation of inter-state rivers.

What Are The Key Challenges Facing The Mekedatu Project?

Protected Forest Submergence: The reservoir would flood a large area of the Cauvery Wildlife Sanctuary, set up in 1987 across 510.52 sq km under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.

Threatened Species: The sanctuary is a key elephant corridor and home to rare species (Source: Karnataka Forest Department).

  • Example: The grizzled giant squirrel, listed as Near Threatened by the IUCN, is found in Karnataka only along the Cauvery banks in this sanctuary, and its habitat would be lost to submergence.

Federal Deadlock: The dispute has dragged on through courts, tribunals and expert bodies for over a decade.

  • Example: In 2022, Tamil Nadu moved the Supreme Court to stop the CWMA from even discussing the Mekedatu DPR at its meeting, arguing that the issue lay beyond the Authority’s powers.

Political Polarisation: Mekedatu has become a symbol of regional identity in both states, which makes compromise politically costly.

  • Example: The Tamil Nadu Assembly unanimously passed a resolution opposing the project, while Karnataka has said it is open to talks but will not drop it.

Water Quality Concerns: Tamil Nadu also raises the issue of sewage and industrial effluents from Bengaluru entering the Cauvery and Pennaiyar rivers.

  • Example: The Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board collects water samples near the inter-state border to monitor pollution from Karnataka, which deepens mistrust over any new upstream project.

Way Forward 

Institutional Solutions

  • Let Expert Bodies Decide: The CWC, CWMA and CWRC should complete their appraisal on technical merits, as the Supreme Court directed.

    • Example: In its November 2025 ruling, the Supreme Court said the final decision must come only after the DPR is examined by the CWC with the opinions of the CWMA and CWRC.

  • Joint Basin Management: A neutral, jointly run body could operate the reservoir so that releases to Tamil Nadu are guaranteed.

    • Example: The Bhakra Beas Management Board, a statutory body under the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966, jointly manages the Bhakra–Nangal and Beas projects for several partner states.

  • Basin-Wide Caps: Global practice shows that a binding, basin-wide limit on water use can reduce conflict .

    • Example: Australia’s Murray–Darling Basin Authority sets sustainable diversion limits across several states, with water use monitored and published transparently.

Demand-Side And Ecological Options

  • Alternatives For Bengaluru: The city can reduce its dependence on new dams through water reuse and rainwater harvesting.

    • Example: Karnataka’s K.C. Valley project pumps treated wastewater from Bengaluru to fill tanks in Kolar district, recharging groundwater in a drought-prone region.

  • Minimise Forest Loss: Any design should reduce submergence and protect wildlife corridors, with genuine compensatory afforestation.

  • Real-Time Data Sharing: Live, transparent data on rainfall, storage and releases can build trust between the states.

Conclusion

Mekedatu tests whether India’s cooperative federalism can balance urban water security, farmers’ rights downstream and ecological protection. A durable solution needs expert-led decisions, transparent data and joint management, not prolonged litigation.

Source: NEWINDIANEXPRESS

PRACTICE QUESTION

Q. Why do inter-state river disputes in India last decades, and how can they be fixed? (15 Marks, 250 Words)