National Water Policy, 2012

National Water Policy is formulated by the Ministry of Water Resources to govern the planning and development of water resources and their optimum utilization. The first National Water Policy was adopted in September, 1987. It was reviewed and updated in 2002 and later in 2012. The 2012 Policy treats water as economic good which the ministry claims to promote its conservation and efficient use.

Other salient features are:

1. To ensure access to a minimum quantity of potable water for essential health and hygiene to all citizens, available within easy reach of the household.
2. To curtail subsidy to agricultural electricity users.
3. Setting up of Water Regulatory Authority in each State. The Authority, inter-alia, will fix and regulate the water tariff system and charges, in general, according to the principles stated in this Policy in an autonomous manner.
4. To keep aside a portion of the river flow to meet the ecological needs and to ensure that the low and high flow releases correspond in time closely to the natural flow regime.
5. To give statutory powers to Water Users Associations to maintain the distribution system.
6. Project benefited families to bear part of the cost of resettlement & rehabilitation of project affected families.
7. To remove the large disparity between stipulations for water supply in urban areas and in rural areas.
8. To support a National Water Framework Law.

Pixelzz: ocean in palm.

Cauvery file: Impact of 1956.

The year 1956 has a very profound impact on the political history of India as it witnessed passing of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956 as a major reform of the boundaries of India's states and territories, organising them along linguistic lines.

The Act came into effect alongwith the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956, which (among other things) restructured the constitutional framework for India's existing states and the requirements to pass the States Reorganisation Act, 1956 under the provisions of Artcles 3 & 4 of the constitution.

Impacts on the concerned states.

1. Kerala: formed by the merger of Travancore-Cochin state with the Malabar district of Madras State.
2. Madras State: The southern part of Travancore-Cochin (Kanyakumari district) was added to the state. (The state was renamed Tamil Nadu in 1968.)
3. Mysore State: enlarged by the addition of Coorg State and the Kannada speaking districts from southern Bombay state and western Hyderabad state. (The state was renamed Karnataka in 1973.)
4. Puducherry had already become a de facto Union territory in 1954. It entered into the dispute in 1978.

All these changes further changed the equations as Kerala and Puducherry also jumped into the fray. Kerala staked its claim as one of the major tributaries of the Kaveri, the Kabini, now originated in Kerala. The Karaikal region of Puducherry at the tail end of the river demanded the waters that it had always used for drinking and some minimal agriculture.

Inter-State Water Disputes Act of 1956.

The Inter-State Water Disputes Act of 1956 was legislated to deal with conflicts, and included provisions for the establishment of tribunals to adjudicate where direct negotiations have failed. However, states have sometimes refused to accept the decisions of tribunals.

Cauvery water dispute: the history behind.

Introduction.

Kaveri river flows in South Karnataka and then to Tamil Nadu. The sharing of waters of the river Kaveri has been the source of a serious conflict between the Indian states of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. 

• The genesis of this conflict, rests in two controversial agreements—one signed in 1892 and another in 1924—between the erstwhile Madras Presidency and Princely State of Mysore. 

• The 802 km Kaveri river has 32,000 sq km basin area in Karnataka and 44,000 sq km basin area in Tamil Nadu. 

• The state of Karnataka contends that it does not receive its due share of water from the river as does Tamil Nadu. Karnataka claims that these agreements were skewed heavily in favour of the Madras Presidency, and has demanded a renegotiated settlement based on "equitable sharing of the waters". 

• Tamil Nadu, on the other hand, pleads that it has already developed almost 3,000,000 acres (12,000 km2) of land and as a result has come to depend very heavily on the existing pattern of usage. Any change in this pattern, it says, will adversely affect the livelihood of millions of farmers in the state. Decades of negotiations between the parties bore no fruit. 

• The Governmentof India then constituted a tribunal in 1990 to look into the matter. After hearing arguments of all the parties involved for the next 16 years, the tribunal delivered its final verdict on 5 February 2007. 

Background of the Conflict.

During middle of the 19th century, numerous plans were drawn up for the utilization of the Kaveri waters by the Princely State of Mysore and the Madras Presidency, of which Tamil Nadu was a part. However, the drought and subsequent famine in the mid-1870s put a hold on the implementation of these plans. The plans were revived by Princely State of Mysore in 1881.

Mysore's plans to revive the irrigation projects met with resistance from the Madras Presidency. Mysore state made a representation to the then British government, after which, a conference was held in 1890 and the Agreement of 1892 was signed.

Agreement of 1892.

This recognised the need for an agreement which would on the one hand allow Mysore reasonable freedom in dealing with its irrigation works and also give Madras practical security against injury to its interests.

In June 1891, Mysore forwarded a set of rules to Madras defining the limit within which no new irrigation works were to be constructed by Mysore across the 15 main rivers without previous reference to Madras.

Some minor changes in the rules suggested by Madras were accepted by Mysore which later resulted in the 1892 agreement which vested prescriptive rights to Madras in sharing the waters of Cauvery.

Construction of dam.

Things came to a head in 1910 when Mysore, under Nalvadi Krishnaraja Wodeyar as the king and Sir. M.Visvesvaraya as Chief Engineer came up with a plan to construct a dam at Kannambadi village (in Mysore) to hold up to 41.5 TMC of water. 

• The dam was planned to be built in two stages. In the first stage a capacity of 11 TMC was envisioned, while in the second stage the full capacity was set to be realized. 
• Madras however, refused to give its consent for this move as it had its own plans to build a storage dam at Mettur with a capacity of 80 TMC.

After a reference to the Government of India, permission was accorded to Mysore, but for a reduced storage of 11TMC. During construction, however, the foundation was laid to suit the earlier desired full storage. This raised Madras' hackles and the dispute continued.

• The then British Government of India referred the matter to arbitration under Rule IV of the 1892 Agreement. The Kaveri dispute thus had come up for arbitration for the first time.

Award of arbitration was given on 12 May 1914. The award upheld the earlier decision of the Government of India and allowed Mysore to go ahead with the construction of the dam up to 11 TMC.

Madras appealed against the award and negotiations continued. Eventually an agreement was arrived at in 1924 and a couple of minor agreements were also signed in 1929 and 1933. The 1924 agreement was set to lapse after a run of 50 years.

Agreement of 1924.

The 1924 agreement was set to lapse after a run of 50 years. As a result of these agreements Karnataka claimed that Mysore was forced to give up rights to over 80% of the Cauvery waters. However both Mysore and Madras were able to complete their projects at Kannambadi and Mettur respectively. According to the Agreement of 1924, Mysore Government constructed the Krishnarajasagara dam at Kannambadi to a capacity of 45 TMC, Madras Government built the Mettur dam to hold 93.5 TMC. If the 1892 agreement could last only for 32 years the 1924 agreement which should have been declared no more operative in 1947 continued till 1974.

A Thirsty Shadow

I think you all might have guessed right. Yes this pic represents the shade of the tap in the mid of a day. It gives us a message that if we don't conserve water today, we will have nothing for tomorrow, except a Thirsty Shadow of a tap.

“What we are doing to the forests of the world is but a mirror reflection of what we are doing to ourselves and to one another.”

― Mahatma Gandhi

 

“This book was written using 100% recycled words.”

― Terry Pratchett, Wyrd Sisters

“Oh Beautiful for smoggy skies, insecticided grain, For strip-mined mountain's majesty above the asphalt plain. America, America, man sheds his waste on thee, And hides the pines with billboard signs, from sea to oily sea.”

― George Carlin

 

“Nature is not a place to visit. It is home.”

― Gary Snyder

Reflexion on Floor

This photo was clicked on a rainy day at NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad. The special feature about this image is that the floor on which the words DINING HALL is reflected was full of water as a result of rain. Due to the water on the floor, the words are clearly visible.

गाँव शहर सब प्यासा है

The poem depicts the uncertainty of Mansoon in India

गाँव शहर सब प्यासा है। 

दिखती हर ओर निराशा है। 

जब तू बरसे बिन रोके तो,

दिखती बस हरियाली है। 

पुष्प पेड़ सब बड़े हो गए,

हर उपवन में माली है। 

अब धरती उगलेगी सोना,

हम सब की यही आशा है। 

तू हमसे जो रूठ गया,

तो ये धरती अब रोती है। 

बच्चे तो खाते हैं लेकिन,

मां तो भूखी सोती है। 

खेत भी हैं सूखे पड़े,

फ़िर क्यों तेरा तमाशा है। 

इस बरस तो तू ऐसा बरसा,

अपना घर तो टूट गया। 

पानी ही पानी दिखता है,

सब कुछ पीछे छूट गया। 

क्या ये तेरा नया रूप है,

अपनी ये जिज्ञासा है। 

गाँव शहर सब प्यासा है। 

दिखती हर ओर निराशा है।