Interview 2015 Group II

7/23/2019 Interview 2015 Group II

1/80

1 | Page

SAIDAI DURAISAMYS

MANIDHA NAEYAM FREE IAS ACADEMYNo.28, First Main Road, CIT Nagar, Chennai 35

Ph: 044-2435 8373 Cell: 9840106162Email :[email protected] :www.saidais.com

TNPSC GROUP II SERVICES 2013-14 (INTERVIEW POSTS)

BASIC INTERVIEW TIPS The interview is an opportunity for further screening. Through an

interview both parties start to form impressions of whether a fit existsbetween your qualifications/personality and the organization /position.

To fill up the posts of various departments in the Government of

TamilNadu, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (TNPSC) isconducting both written examination and interview to select thesuitable candidate.

What is the Commission seeking?Three main areas the Commission typically look at in the selectionprocess:

What can you do for us?If selected, how can you contribute to the department and/ororganization differently than other interview candidates? This can bedemonstrated through your educational background, priorexperience, special skills and Knowledge.

Why do you want to work under the Government?The Commission wants to make sure the candidate chosen has a solid

understanding of the department and position. As a candidate youneed to state why you want to work in a government posts/services.Also, you need to convey to the commission that you have a realisticpicture of the job.

What are you like once weve gotten to know you?The Commission is looking at areas such as your motivation,initiative, creativity, problem-solving abilities and team-work skills,

and how these skills will continue once you are selected and part ofthe organization and department.
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.saidais.com/http://www.saidais.com/http://www.saidais.com/http://www.saidais.com/mailto:[email protected]


2/80

2 | Page

On the Day of Interview

1. For all the posts, interview is held at the premises of the Tamil Nadu

Public Service Commission. Reach the venue one hour before thescheduled time.

2. During the day of interview take enough food and go cheerfully.

3. Gents: it is better to use dark colour pant and matching light colourshirts.

4.

Gents should keep their normal hairstyle and be smart inappearance, preferably with shaved face.

5. Ladies: it is better to use cotton sarees or churidars;

6.

Do not use dresses of hard colours.

7. Better, do not use brand new dresseswhile attending interviews as

the candidate may not be familiar with the new dress which mightcause irritation.

8. Use properly ironed cloths.

9. Do not use excessive cosmetics.

10. Do not use excessive oilon the hair.

11. Do not have mobile with you while going to the interview.

12. Take a copy of the Bio-Data together with a photo copy ofapplication you have sent already to TNPSC with you.

13. Keep all certificates and documents in proper order in a plasticfolder/file.


3/80

3 | Page

14. Always have 2 photocopies of certificates, you are going toproduce to the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission duly attestedby the gazette officer.

15. You will be asked to sit in a room for the verification of certificates.The officers who are working in Tamil Nadu Public ServiceCommission will come and verify the certificates. During that timediscuss something relevant to the interview.

16. Do not make any noise in the room.

17. Do not exhibit any certificate unless asked for.

18.

After the verification of certificates are over and once the interviewhas commenced you will be taken to the board by the assistants forthe interview. You will be asked to sit in front of the board room for 23 minutes.

19. Non verbal Messages: Non- verbal language speaks larger thanwords. As you walk in the interview room, here are a few things thatyou must keep in mind.

20. Start it off like a winner.

May I came in: Once the door of the interview chamber hasbeen opened by the assistants, say May I come in Sir or MayI come in .

Say Good morning: with a pleasant smile and a positive and

confident attitude. Posture: after wishing the interview board, stand erect nearby

your seat.

Say Thank you:once you are asked to take your seat, say thankyou.

Dont Fidget:There is nothing worse than people playing withtheir hair, clicking pen tops, tapping feet or unconsciouslytouching parts of the body.

Eye Contact:Answer the questions looking straight at the faceof the officer. Do not look here and there. Look the interviewerin the eye.


4/80

4 | Page

Move your hands:Gesturing or talking with your hands is verynatural, but keep it in moderation.

21. Be comfortable. Take a seat facing the interviewer, however,slightly off center, be sure that you are in a comfortable position.

22. Listen attentively. Listen to the questions, think carefully and givecorrect answers in a clear voice.

23.

Avoid nervous mannerisms. Pay attention to nervousmannerisms. Everyone is nervous to some extent; the key is to appearcalm and composed.

24.

Speak clearly. Use good grammar and a friendly tone. Try toavoid answer just yes or no to a question. Always clarify, expandon your answers. Be sure not to go on rambling.

25. Be positive and enthusiastic.Pump up your enthusiasm prior tothe interview. Never whine gripe or complain about past employers,jobs, classes etc.

26.

while giving answers to questions:

a. Be Concise:Listen to the questions carefully and answerto the point. An interviewee rambling on is likely to turnoff the interviewer.

b.Provide Examples: Support your contentions withexample. Think of recent strong strategic example of

work youve done, then when the question is askedanswer say I do not know Avoid incorrect answer withspecifics, not in generalities.

c. Be Honest: It is always better to state the truth thanbeating about the bush. If you are not sure about theanswer say I do not know Avoid incorrect answers.

d.Avoid jokes and loose talks.e. Do not arguewith the Interviewer.

f.

Say Thanks/ Have a nice day/ Good day/ Have a

pleasant day/ Have a wonderful day to theinterviewer/ board at the end of the Interview.


5/80

5 | Page

Common Questions in Interview Board

1.

Tell me about yourself.

2. What are your extra curricular activities?

3. What are your Strengths?

4. What are you weaknesses?

5. How do you define success?

6.

Where do you see yourself 5 years from now?

7. What are the specific achievements in your life?

8. What subjects did you like best in School/ College?

9. Why Maths/English/Physics?

10. Which are the books you read currently?

11.

Which programs do you watch on TV?12.

What is your favourite book?

13. How do you spend your free time?

14. Which games you like to play the most?

15. What will you do if you are not selected?

16. Tell me a joke.

17. Who is your role model and why?

18. Why did you prefer to college where you studied?

19.

Why should we appoint you?

20. What is your dream job?

21. What kind of people do you enjoy working with?

22.

What are your expectations from life?

23. Please narrate your work history and education in brief.


6/80

6 | Page

24. Can you describe your positive and negatives points?

25. Can you describe your leadership qualities with an example?

26. What are the things you find most uncomfortable in a post?

27.

In your previous job, what kind of pressures did you encounter?

28. What is your long-term employment or career objective?

29. Why do you think you will be successful I such a post?

30. How does this post fit in with your overall career goals?

31. Who or what in your life influenced you most with your career

objectives?

32. What would be your goal if you this post?

33. How would you describe yourself as a person?

34. What are the most important characteristics and abilities a person must

possess to become a successful?

35. In your work experience, what have you done that you consider truly

creative?

36. What kind of problems have people recently called on you to solve?

Tell me what you have devised.

37. What was your most difficult decision in the last six months? What

made it difficult?

38.

What was the last major problem that you were confronted with? What

action did you take on it?

39. Do you have a long and short-term for your department? Is it realistic?

40. What are the standards of success in your job?

41. When judging the performance of your subordinate, what factors or

characteristics are most important to you?


7/80

7 | Page

42. In your present job, what approach do you take to get your people

together to establish a common approach to a problem?

43. What approach do you take in getting your people to accept your ideas

or department goals?

44. How do you get people who do not want to work together to establish

a common approach to a problem?

45. Do you feel you work more effectively on a one to one basis or in a

group situation?

46. Would you rather write a report or give a verbal report? Why?

47. Why did you choose this career?

48. Tell us something about your family background

49. Tell us about the problems in your hometown. What are the solutions

to those problems?

50. Tell us about the headlines in the newspaper you have read today?


8/80

8 | Page

TNPSCNeh;Kfj;Njh;Tf;fhd Nfs;tpfs

I. jdpggl;l (Personal)Nfs;tpfs;

1. cq;fs;ngah; vd;d?

2. cq;fs;fy;tpj;jFjpiaf;$wTk;.

3. cq;fisg;gw;wpf; $wTk;.Gjpy;: vd;Dila ngah;> fy;tpj;jFjp> Ntiyg; ghh;f;fpd;wNghd;wit gw;wp tptuq;fs;

4. cq;fs;nrhe;j Ch;vJ?

5. cq;fs;gs;sp /fy;Y}hp /gy;fiyf;fofk;- d;rpd;dq;fs;vd;d?

II. FLkgk;njhlhghd Nfstpfs;

1. cq;fs;ngw;Nwhhpd;njhopy;kw;Wk; tUkhdk;?

III. elgG epfoTfs

- jhYfh/khtl;lk; /khepyk;/Njrpa /cyf mstpy;

IV. fyY}happy;gbjj bfphp/ P.Gbfphp ghlqfs

- mbg;gilf;Nfs;tpfs;

- (c.k;. tzpftpay;bfphp gbj;jth;fSf;fhd Nfs;tpfs;

1. What is book keeping?

2.

What is trial balance?

3. What is balance-sheet?

4.

What are the duties of the Auditor?Ans: The verification of assets and liabilities

V. jwNghija gzp

1.

jw;NghJ gzpahw;Wk;Jiwapd;gzp vd;d?

2. jw;Nghija gzpf;fhd flikfs;ahit?


9/80

9 | Page

3. Jiwapd;gbepiy mikg;G (hierarchy)

4. Jiwapd;Kf;fpaj;Jtk;(importance)

VI. vjph;fhyg gzp

ehk;tpz;zg;gj;jpy;njhptpj;jpUe;j 4 my;yJ 5 tpUg;gkhd gjtpfs;

(c.k;)

1. cjtp tphpT mYtyh;(rl;lk; kw;Wk;ePjpj;Jiw ePq;fyhf)

2. cjtp gphpT mYtyh;(rl;lj;Jiw)

3.

cjtp gphpT mYtyh;(ePjpj;Jiw)

4. ed;dlj;ij mYtyh;(r%f ghJfhg;Gj;Jiw)

5. ,sepiy Ntiytha;g;G mYtyh;

6. rhh;gjpthsh;%d;whk;epiy

Nkw;fz;l gjtpfspy;fPo;fz;l Nfs;tpfs;Nfl;fg;gLk;

i. mj;Jiwapd;gzp vd;d?

ii. mg;gzpf;fhd flikfs;ahit?

iii. me;jg; gzpapd; Jiwf;fhd gbepiy mikg;G vd;d?

(hierarchy)

iv.

me;jg;gzpf;fhd Jiwapd;Kf;fpaj;Jtk; (importance)

VII. jwNghija tL cs;s khtllk kwWk;nrhej Chpd khtl;lk

1. tptrhak;

2. njhopw;rhiyfs;

3.

ePh;g;ghrdk;

4. mizf;fl;Lfs;


10/80

10 | Page

5. Rw;wyhj;jyq;fs;

6. gz;ghL (tpohf;fs;Kjypa ....)

7. Kf;fpa kw;Wk;Gfo;tha;e;j egh;fs;

8.

Kf;fpa Nfhtpy;fs;> Njthyaq;fs;kw;Wk;k#jpfs;

(c.k;) tpUJefh;khtl;lk;

i. tpUJefhpy; cs;s Kf;fpar;re;ij (gyruf;Fg;

nghUl;fSf;fhdJ) jkpo;ehl;by;Fwpg;gplj;jFe;j xd;whFk;. (kw;wKf;fpar;re;ij: nghs;shr;rp MFk;)

ii.

kj;jpa murpd; jkpo;ehl;bw;fhd mf;khh;f; ju eph;za epWtdk;tpUJefhpy; kl;Lk; cs;sJ.

iii. jPg;ngl;b> gl;lhR> mr;R kw;Wk; vOJnghUl;fs;njhopw;rhiyfs;

rptfhrpapYk;> gUj;jp-nerT> ghz;Nl[; Jzp cw;gj;jpnjhopw;rhiyfs;uh[ghisak;Rw;W tl;lhuj;jpYk;cs;sd.

iv. Foe;ijj;njhopyhsh;epiy

v. Kd;dhs; Kjy;th;fs; - fhkuh[h; kw;Wk; Fkhurhkpuh[h gpwe;j

Ch;fs;cs;sd.

vi. jkpo;ehl;by; cs;s xNu gid Muha;r;rp epiyak;

jpUtpy;ypg;Gj;J}hpy;cs;sJ.

vii. ukd kfhp~papd;gpwe;j Ch;jpUr;Rop MFk;

viii.

=tpy;ypGj;J}hpy; cs;s Mz;lhs; Nfhtpypd; Kf;fpaj;Jtk;vd;d?Mz;lhs; Nfhtpypd;NfhGuk;jkpof murpd; rpd;dkhf (Kj;jpiu)cs;sJ.

VIII. HOBBIES

1. `hf;fp /fhy;ge;J /fphpf;nfl;tpisahLjy;- xU Ntis ePq;fs; fhy;ge;J MLfpNwd; vd;W $wpdhy;>

fhy;ge;J tpisahl;ilg; gw;wp KOtJk; njhpa Ntz;Lk;.

(,d;iwa epiy tiu)


11/80

11 | Page

- fhy;ge;J cyf> Njrpa> khepy mstpy;ve;j tpisahl;LtPuh;ngah;Nghdth;.

- ];Nlbak;ngah;

2. Njhl;l Ntiy

3. ,ir

4. rpdpkhj;jpiug;glk;(Motion Picture)

5. thndhyp epfo;r;rpfisf;ftdpj;Jf; Nfl;ly;

6. njhiyf;fhl;rp epfo;r;rpfis ghh;j;jy;

7.

Xtpak;

8. ehty;fis thrpj;jy;

NkNy $wpa fhy;ge;J tpisahl;L Nghy;> 2 Kjy; 8 tiuNghd;witfSf;Fk;> ehk; mijg;gw;wp KOtJk; njhpe;J itj;jpUf;fNtz;Lk;.

IX. nghJ

-

Neh;Kfj; Njh;tpd; NghJ ePq;fs; $Wk; gjpy;fs; eLepiyikNahL ,Uf;f Ntz;Lk;(impartial)

- ePq;fs; ahh; vd;W Neh;Kfj; Njh;tpd; NghJ ntspf;fhl;lf;

$lhJ. (c.k;) nghJTilik / rkjh;kk; nghpahhpd;Nfhl;ghLfs; / ef;ry;fs; / jPtputhjk; / jPtpu kjf;fUj;Jf;fs; / mbg;gilthjk; - Nghd;witfSf;FMjuthd fUj;Jf;fisj;njhptpf;ff;$lhJ.

-

rpf;fyhd Nfs;tpfSf;F gjpy;fs;eLepiyikAld; ,Uj;jy;Ntz;Lk;.

Fwpg;ghf

1. ,e;jpah - =yq;fh cwTfs;

2. ,yq;ifj;jkpoh;gpur;rid vd;d?

-

,e;jpa - ,yq;if xg;ge;jk;> 1987

- tpLjiyg;Gypfs;- ,yq;if muR Nghh;epWj;j xg;ge;jk;


12/80

12 | Page

- ,e;j Nghh;epWj;j xg;ge;jk;vg;NghJ Kwpe;jJ?

- ,e;j xg;ge;jj;jpw;F ehh;Nt ehl;bd;gq;fspg;G vd;d?

- ,e;j xg;ge;jk;Kwpe;j gpd;dh;vd;d epfo;Tfs;epfo;e;jJ?

3. ,];Nuy; - ghy];jPdg;gpur;rid

4. ,e;jpa mnkhpf;f mZ xg;ge;jk;

5. ,e;jpah ghfp];jhd;cwTfs;

6. ghyhW Mw;wpd; gpur;ridfs;

7. nghpahW mizf;fl;Lg; gpur;ridfs;

X. cly;nkhop

1. Neh;Kfj; Njh;tpd; NghJ> ehw;fhypapy; mkUk; NghJ KOtJkhfcl;fhu Ntz;Lk;.

(ehw;fhypapd;Edpapy;cl;fhuf;$lhJ)(ehw;fhypapy;KOtJkhf mkh;e;J kpfTk;rha;thf J}q;Ffpw khjphp

,Uf;ff;$lhJ)

2. Neh;Kfj; Njh;tpd; NghJ> ehw;fhypapy; ekJ KJF tisT

,y;yhky;> Neuhf mkh;;e;J ,Uf;f Ntz;Lk;. (without bent)

Neh;Kfj;Njh;tpwfhd EZff;fqfs

1.

Njhw;wk;(Appearance)

2. cil (Dress)

3. jd;dk;gpf;if (Self-confidence)

4. jtWfis xj;Jf;nfhs;Sk;kdg;ghd;ik

5. Neh;ik (Honesty)

6.

JzpT (Courage)

7. njspT (Clarity)


13/80

13 | Page

Neh;KfjNjh;tpd NghJ nraa Ntz;bait(Dos)

1. Nfl;fg;gLfpw Nfs;tpfis rhpahfg; Ghpe;J nfhz;L gjpyspg;gJk;>njspTld;RUf;fkhf fr;rpjkhd thpfspy;tpilaspg;gJk;mtrpakhFk;.

2. njhpahj Nfs;tpfSf;FnjhpahJ

vdr; nrhy;fpw Neh;ikia

midtUNk (including interview board members)kjpg;ghh;fs;.

3. gjpyspf;Fk; NghJ jd;dk;gpf;ifAld; tpilaspf;f Ntz;Lk;.(eLf;fj;Jld; tpilaspj;jhy; Njh;thsh; ek;ikf; Fog;Gtjw;F Kaw;rpnra;a Nehplyhk;)

Neh;KfjNjh;tpd NghJ nraaf lhjit (Donts)

1. Njh;thshplk;tpthjk;nra;tNjh> Nfhgj;Jld;gjpy;$wNth $lhJ.

2. cly;kw;Wk;iffis Ml;bg;Ngrf;$lhJ.

kww EZffqfs;(Other Techniques)

1. md;ghd mZFKiw (Soft approach)

2. kw;w tpz;zg;gjhuh;fs; / Nghl;bahsh;fs; cld; xg;gplhik (Non

comparison)

3. fye;jhNyhrpj;jy;(Counselling)

4. nghOJNghf;Ffs;/jsh;j;Jjy;(Relaxation)

- elj;jy;> tpisahLjy;> g+q;fh /flw;fiu / Vhpf;fiu /tptrhaj;Njhl;lk;my;yJ fodp Nghd;witfSf;Fr;nry;Yjy;

- ,ir> jpiug;glk; /njhiyf;fhl;rp /thndhyp

- Xtpak;


14/80

14 | Page

IMPORTANT DEPARTMENTAL HIERARCHY

Department of commercial taxes:Administrative Hierarchy:

Before 30thJuly 2008 Now, Redesignated as

Commissioner Commissioner

Joint Commissioner Additional Commissioner

Deputy Commissioner Joint Commissioner

Assistant Commissioner Deputy Commissioner

Commercial Tax Officer Assistant Commissioner

Deputy Commercial Tax Officer Commercial Tax Officer

Assistant Commercial Tax Officer Assistant Commercial Tax Officer

Department of Registration

Registration department is functioning from the year 1865.

The department is providing a valuable and important service to thepublic in registering documents of sale, lease, mortgage, will etcinvolving transfer of immovable properties like land and buildings.

The registration of the documents gives legal status for the transactions.

The department is levying and collecting stamp duty on the marketvalue of the immovable property involved in the transaction.

Registration fee is also collected for the service rendered by thedepartment in the registration of the documents.


15/80

15 | Page

Administrative Hierarchy:

Inspector general of registration

Addition Inspector general of registration

Deputy Inspector general of registration

Assistant Inspector general of registration

District registrar

Sub registrar


16/80

16 | Page

Department of labour

OrganizationThe labor department is functioning under the administrative

control of the labour and employment department in the secretariat. Thecommissioner of labour is the head of the department.

Organization set up:

Commissioner of labour

Additional Commissioner of labour

Joint Commissioner of labour

Deputy Commissioner of labour

Assistant Commissioner of labour, Labour officer,Inspector of Plantations

Deputy Commercial Tax Officer

Commercial Tax Officer

Inspector of labour

Deputy Inspector of labour

Assistant Inspectors labour


17/80

17 | Page

REVENUE DEPARTMENT

Chief Secretary

Revenue Secretary

Commissioner of RevenueAdministration

District Collector

District Revenue Officer /Additional collector

Revenue Divisional OfficerSub Collector

Tahsildar

Revenue Inspector

Village AdministrativeOfficer

Deputy Tahsildar


18/80

18 | Page

IMPORTANT TOPICS

Kaveri River water dispute

This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclearbecause it has insufficient inline citations.Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citationswhere appropriate.(March 2009)

Kaveri river flows in South Karnataka and then to Tamil Nadu.

The sharing of waters of the river Kaveri had been the bone of contention of a serious conflictbetween theIndian states ofKarnataka andTamil Nadu.The genesis of this disparity, itself, lies

in two controversial agreements, one signed in 1892 and another in 1924, between the MadrasPresidency and the Princely State of Mysore.

The state of Karnataka feels that it has not got its due share of water utilization viv a vis TamilNadu. Karnataka claims that these agreements were skewed heavily in favour of the MadrasPresidency, and has since demanded a renegotiated settlement based on "equitable sharing of thewaters". Tamil Nadu, on the other hand, pleads that it has already developed almost3,000,000 acres (12,000 km2) of land and as a result has come to depend very heavily on theexisting pattern of usage. Any change in this pattern, it says, will adversely affect the livelihoodof millions of farmers in the state.

Decades of negotiations between the parties bore no fruit. The Government of India thenconstituted a tribunal in 1990 to look into the matter. After hearing arguments of all the partiesinvolved for the last 16 years, the tribunal delivered its final verdict on 5 February 2007. In itsverdict, the tribunal allocated 419 billion ft (12 km) of water annually to Tamil Nadu and 270billion ft (7.6 km) to Karnataka; 30 billion ft (0.8 km) of Kaveri river water to Kerala and 7billion ft (0.2 km) to Puducherry. The dispute however, seems far from over with all four statesdeciding to file review petitions seeking clarifications and possible renegotiation of the order.

KarnatakaTamilNadu Kerala PondicherryTotal

Basin Area (in km)34,273(42%)

44,016(54%)

2,866(3.5%)

148(-) 81,155

Drought area in the basin(in km)

21,870(63.8%)

12,790(29.2%)

-- -- 34,660

Contribution of state (inbillion ft according to

Ktaka)

425 (53.7%)252(31.8%)

113(14.3%)

790

Contribution of state (inbillion ft according to

392 (52.9%)222(30%)

126(17%)

740
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sourceshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Adding_the_citationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Fact_and_Reference_Checkhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:When_to_citehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaverihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States_and_territories_of_Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karnatakahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karnatakahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karnatakahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keralahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keralahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pondicherryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pondicherryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pondicherryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keralahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karnatakahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karnatakahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/States_and_territories_of_Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaverihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:When_to_citehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Fact_and_Reference_Checkhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Adding_the_citationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources


19/80

19 | Page

TN)

Quantity demanded byeach state

465 (41%)566(50%)

100 (9%) 9.3 (1%) 1140.3

Share for each state as

per TN's demand

177 (24%)566

(76%)

5 (1%) - 748

Share for each state asper tribunal verdict of2007

270 (37%)419(58%)

30 (4%) 7 (1%) 726

Contents

1History of the dispute 2Post independence developments 41980s

o 4.1The constitution of the tribunalo 4.2Interim award and the riotso 4.3The crisis of 19951996o 4.4Constitution of the CRA

o 4.5The flare up and high drama of 2002

4.5.1CRA meeting and the Supreme Court order 4.5.2Demonstrations 4.5.3Censure of both states by the Supreme Court

o 4.620032006

5Judgment 6See also 7References

8External links

History of the dispute

The history of this conflict goes back a long way. Disputes have occurred since 1807, but Britishinfluence mediated tensions for several decades. The British controlled bothMysoreandMadrasfor a short period in the middle of the 19th century. During their regime, numerous plans weredrawn up for the utilization of the Kaveri waters by both states. However, the drought andsubsequent famine in the mid 1870s put a hold on the implementation of these plans. The plans

were revived by Mysore in 1881, by which time Mysore was back in the hands of the Mysorekings, while present dayTamil Naducontinued to remain a part of the Madras Presidency.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#History_of_the_dispute#History_of_the_disputehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#Post_independence_developments#Post_independence_developmentshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#1980s#1980shttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#The_constitution_of_the_tribunal#The_constitution_of_the_tribunalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#Interim_award_and_the_riots#Interim_award_and_the_riotshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#The_crisis_of_1995.E2.80.931996#The_crisis_of_1995.E2.80.931996http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#The_crisis_of_1995.E2.80.931996#The_crisis_of_1995.E2.80.931996http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#The_crisis_of_1995.E2.80.931996#The_crisis_of_1995.E2.80.931996http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#Constitution_of_the_CRA#Constitution_of_the_CRAhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#The_flare_up_and_high_drama_of_2002#The_flare_up_and_high_drama_of_2002http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#CRA_meeting_and_the_Supreme_Court_order#CRA_meeting_and_the_Supreme_Court_orderhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#Demonstrations#Demonstrationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#Censure_of_both_states_by_the_Supreme_Court#Censure_of_both_states_by_the_Supreme_Courthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#2003.E2.80.932006#2003.E2.80.932006http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#2003.E2.80.932006#2003.E2.80.932006http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#2003.E2.80.932006#2003.E2.80.932006http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#Judgment#Judgmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#See_also#See_alsohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#References#Referenceshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#External_links#External_linkshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Mysorehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Mysorehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Mysorehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madras_Presidencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madras_Presidencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madras_Presidencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaverihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaverihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaverihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madras_Presidencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Mysorehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#External_links#External_linkshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#References#Referenceshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#See_also#See_alsohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#Judgment#Judgmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#2003.E2.80.932006#2003.E2.80.932006http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#Censure_of_both_states_by_the_Supreme_Court#Censure_of_both_states_by_the_Supreme_Courthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#Demonstrations#Demonstrationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#CRA_meeting_and_the_Supreme_Court_order#CRA_meeting_and_the_Supreme_Court_orderhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#The_flare_up_and_high_drama_of_2002#The_flare_up_and_high_drama_of_2002http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#Constitution_of_the_CRA#Constitution_of_the_CRAhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#The_crisis_of_1995.E2.80.931996#The_crisis_of_1995.E2.80.931996http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#Interim_award_and_the_riots#Interim_award_and_the_riotshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#The_constitution_of_the_tribunal#The_constitution_of_the_tribunalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#1980s#1980shttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#Post_independence_developments#Post_independence_developmentshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaveri_River_Water_Dispute#History_of_the_dispute#History_of_the_dispute


20/80

20 | Page

Mysore'splans to revive the irrigation projects met with resistance from the Madras Presidency.Mysore state made a representation to the then British government; as a result of which, aconference was held in 1890 with the objective of agreeing "on the principles of a modusvivendi, which would on the one hand allow to Mysore reasonable freedom in dealing with herirrigation works, and on the other, give to Madras practical security against injury to herinterests" and eventually the Agreement of 1892 was signed. Karnataka deems this agreement as

having been between unequal partners because, while Mysore state was a princely state, Madrasformed a part of theBritish Raj.Karnataka also considers this agreement to have been severelyinimical to its interests as it gave sweeping powers and prescriptive rights to Madras, the lowerriparian state. As per this agreement, Mysore was required to obtain Madras' consent for anynew irrigation reservoirs across any of the main rivers it wished to utilize and share informationon any new irrigation scheme it wished to undertake to utilize the waters

Things came to a head in 1910 when Mysore, under Nalvadi Krishnaraja Wodeyaras the kingand Sir. M.Vishweshwariah as Chief Engineer came up with a plan to construct a dam atKannambadi village 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 fullcapacity was set to be realized. Madras however, refused to give its consent for this move as ithad 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 areduced storage of 11TMC. During construction, however, the foundation was laid to suit theearlier desired full storage. This raised Madras' hackles and the dispute continued. As a result,the then British Government of India referred the matter to arbitration under Rule IV of the 1892Agreement. The Cauvery dispute thus had come up for arbitration for the first time.

Sir H D Griffin was appointed arbitrator and M. Nethersole, the Inspector General of Irrigation inIndia, was made the Assessor. They entered into proceedings on 16 July 1913 and the Award wasgiven on 12 May 1914. The award upheld the earlier decision of the Government of India andallowed Mysore to go ahead with the construction of the dam up to 11 TMC.

The agreement also stipulated that Mysore was not to increase its area under irrigation morethan 110,000 acres (450 km2) beyond what was already existing, while the same cap for MadrasPresidency was pegged at 301000|acre|km2. Nonetheless, Madras still appealed against theaward and negotiations continued. Eventually an agreement was arrived at in 1924 and a coupleof minor agreements were also signed in 1929 and 1933. The 1924 agreement was set to lapse

after a run of 50 years. As a result of these agreements, Karnataka claims that Mysore was forcedto give up rights.

Post independence developments

In 1947, India won independence from the British. This changed the equations drastically. TamilNadu was carved out of Madras Presidency andMysoreprovince became a state.

Further in 1956, the reorganization of the states of India took place and state boundaries wereredrawn based on linguistic demographics. Kodagu or Coorg (the birthplace of the Kaveri),

became a part of Mysore state. Huge parts of erstwhile Hyderabad state andBombay Presidencyjoined with Mysore state. Parts of Malabar which earlier formed part of Madras Presidency wentto Kerala.Pondicherryhad already become a de facto Union territory in 1954.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Mysorehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Mysorehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rajhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rajhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rajhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krishna_Raja_Wadiyar_IVhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krishna_Raja_Wadiyar_IVhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mokshagundam_Vishweshwaraiahhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mokshagundam_Vishweshwaraiahhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysore_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysore_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysore_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodaguhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodaguhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombay_Presidencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombay_Presidencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombay_Presidencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pondicherryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pondicherryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pondicherryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pondicherryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombay_Presidencyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodaguhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mysore_statehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mokshagundam_Vishweshwaraiahhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krishna_Raja_Wadiyar_IVhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rajhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Mysore


21/80

21 | Page

All these changes further changed the equations as Kerala and Pondicherry also jumped into thefray. Kerala staked its claim as one of the major tributaries of the Kaveri, the Kabini, noworiginated in Kerala. Karaikal region of Pondicherry at the tail end of the river demanded thewaters that it had always used for drinking and some minimal agriculture. While theseadditional claims complicated matters greatly at a technical level, Mysore state and Tamil Nadustill remained the major parties to the dispute.

By the late 1960s, both states and the Central government began to realize the gravity of thesituation as the 50 year run of the 1924 agreement was soon coming to an end. Negotiations werestarted in right earnest and discussions continued for almost 10 years.

1970s

While discussions continued, a Cauvery Fact Finding Committee (CFFC) was constituted. Thebrief of the CFFC was to inspect the ground realities and come up with a report. The CFFCcame up with a preliminary report in 1972 and a final report in 1973. Inter state discussions were

held based on this report. Finally in 1974, a draft agreement which also provided for the creationof a Cauvery Valley Authority was prepared by the Ministry of Irrigation. This draft however,was not ratified.

While all these discussions went on, Tamil Nadus irrigated lands had grown from a pre -Metturcommand area of 1,440,000 acres (5,800 km2) to 2,580,000 acres (10,400 km2) while Karnatakasirrigated area stood at 680,000 acres (2,800 km). Karnataka maintains that these figuresdemonstrate the lop-sided nature of the agreement

In 1976, after a series of discussions between the two states and the Central government chaired

byJagjeevan Ram,the then Irrigation Minister, a final draft was prepared based on findings ofthe CFFC. This draft was accepted by all states and the Government also made an announcementto that effect in Parliament. Tamil Nadu came under Presidents rule soon after that and theagreement was put on the backburner. When Presidents rule was lifted, the All India AnnaDravida Munnetra Kazhagam(AIADMK) withM. G. Ramachandranat the helm came to powerfor the first time in Tamil Nadu and the dispute took a new turn.

The Tamil Nadu government now rejected the draft agreement and started insisting that the 1924agreement had only provided for an extension and not a review. It began insisting that status quobe restored and everyone go back to the agreements of 1892 and 1924. This however, did not cut

ice with Karnataka which had throughout maintained that those agreements were partisan andhad been signed between unequal partners.

When Karnataka began construction of the Harangi dam at Kushalanagara in Kodagu, it wasonce again met with resistance from Tamil Nadu. Tamil Nadu went to court demanding theconstitution of a Tribunal under the Inter State Water Disputes Act(ISWD) of 1956. It alsodemanded the immediate stoppage of construction work at the dam site. As a result of TamilNadus protests, Karnataka had to fund the construction under the non -plan head and this led toa severe strain on its finances.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabinihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabinihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karaikalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karaikalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jagjeevan_Ramhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jagjeevan_Ramhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jagjeevan_Ramhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_India_Anna_Dravida_Munnetra_Kazhagamhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_India_Anna_Dravida_Munnetra_Kazhagamhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_India_Anna_Dravida_Munnetra_Kazhagamhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._G._Ramachandranhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._G._Ramachandranhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._G._Ramachandranhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harangi&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harangi&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kushalanagarahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kushalanagarahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kushalanagarahttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Harangi&action=edit&redlink=1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._G._Ramachandranhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_India_Anna_Dravida_Munnetra_Kazhagamhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_India_Anna_Dravida_Munnetra_Kazhagamhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_India_Anna_Dravida_Munnetra_Kazhagamhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jagjeevan_Ramhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karaikalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabini


22/80

22 | Page

1980s

Later Tamil Nadu withdrew its case demanding the constitution of a tribunal and the two statesstarted negotiating again. Several rounds of discussions were held in the 80s. The result was still,a stalemate. In 1986, a farmers association from Tanjavur in Tamil Nadu moved the SupremeCourt demanding the constitution of a tribunal. While this case was still pending, the two states

continued many rounds of talks. This continued till April 1990 and yet yielded no results.

The constitution of the tribunal

The Supreme Court then directed the government headed by Prime Minister V. P. Singh toconstitute a tribunal and refer all disputes to it. A three man tribunal was thus constituted on 2

June 1990. The tribunal was headquartered at New Delhi and was to be headed by JusticeChittatosh Mookerjee.

The four states presented their demands to the tribunal as under

Karnataka - claimed 465 billion ft (13 km) as its share Kerala - wants 99.8 billion ft (2.83 km) as its share

Pondicherry - claims 9.3 billion ft (0.3 km)

Tamil Nadu - wants the flows to be ensured in accordance with theterms of the agreements of 1892 and 1924 (ie., 566 billion ft (16km) for Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry; 177 billion ft (5 km) forKarnataka and 5 billion ft (0.1 km) for Kerala).

Interim award and the riots

Soon after the tribunal was set up, Tamil Nadu demanded a mandatory injunction on Karnatakafor the immediate release of water and other reliefs. This was dismissed by the tribunal. TamilNadu now went back to the Supreme Court which directed the tribunal to reconsider TamilNadus plea.

The tribunal reconsidered Tamil Nadus plea and gave an interim award on 25 June 1991. Incoming up with this award, the tribunal calculated the average inflows into Tamil Nadu over a

period of 10 years between 198081 and 198990. The extreme years were ignored for thiscalculation. The average worked out to 205 billion ft (5.8 km) which Karnataka had to ensurereached Tamil Nadu in a water year. The award also stipulated the weekly and monthly flows tobe ensured by Karnataka for each month of the water year. The tribunal further directedKarnataka not to increase it irrigated land area from the existing 1,120,000 acres (4,500 km 2)

Karnataka deemed this extremely inimical to its interests and issued an ordinance seeking toannul the tribunals award. The SupremeCourt now stepped in at the Presidents instance andstruck down the Ordinance issued by Karnataka. It upheld the tribunals award which wassubsequently gazetted by the Government of India on 11 December 1991.

Karnataka was thus forced to accept the interim award and widespread demonstrations andviolence broke out in parts of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu following this. Thousands of Tamilfamilies had to flee fromBangalorein fear of being attacked and lynched. The violence and show
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanjavurhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanjavurhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V._P._Singhhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V._P._Singhhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_peoplehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_peoplehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangalorehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangalorehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangalorehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangalorehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_peoplehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V._P._Singhhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanjavur


23/80

23 | Page

down, mostly centered in the Tamil populated parts of Bangalore, lasted for nearly a month andmost schools and educational institutions in Bangalore remained closed during this period.

The crisis of 19951996

In 1995, the monsoons failed badly in Karnataka and Karnataka found itself hard pressed to

fulfill the interim order. Tamil Nadu approached the Supreme Court demanding the immediaterelease of at least 30 billion ft. The Supreme Court refused to entertain Tamil Nadu's petition andasked it to approach the tribunal. The tribunal examined the case and recommended thatKarntaka release 11 billion ft. Karnataka pleaded that 11 billion ft was unimplementable in thecircumstances that existed then. Tamil Nadu now went back to the Supreme Court demandingthat Karnataka be forced to obey the tribunal's order. The Supreme Court this time recommendedthat the then Prime Minister, Mr. P. V. Narasimha Rao intervene and find a political solution. ThePrime Minister convened a meeting with the Chief Ministers of the two states and recommendedthat Karnataka release 6 billion ft instead of the 11 billion ft that the tribunal ordered.

Karnataka complied with the decision of the Prime Minister and the issue blew over.

Constitution of the CRA

Karnataka had all through maintained that the interim award was not 'scientific' and wasinherently flawed. It had, nevertheless, complied with the order except during 199596 whenrains failed. What complicated matters was that the Interim award was ambiguous on distresssharing and there was no clear cut formula that everyone agreed upon to share the waters in thecase of failure of the monsoon.

In 1997, the Government proposed the setting up of a Cauvery River Authority which would bevested with far reaching powers to ensure the implementation of the Interim Order. Thesepowers included the power to take over the control of dams in the event of the Interim Order notbeing honoured. Karnataka, which had always maintained that the interim order had noscientific basis and was intrinsically flawed, strongly protested the proposal to set up such anauthority.

The Government then made several modifications to the powers of the Authority and came upwith a new proposal. The new proposal greatly reduced the executive powers of the Authority.The power to take over control of dams was also done away with. Under this new proposal, the

Government set up two new bodies, viz., Cauvery River Authority and Cauvery MonitoringCommittee. The Cauvery River Authority would consist of the Prime Minister and the ChiefMinisters of all four states(Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Pondicherry, Kerala) and was headquarteredin New Delhi. The Cauvery Monitoring Committee on the other hand, was an expert body whichconsisted of engineers, technocrats and other officers who would take stock of the 'groundrealities' and report to the

The flare up and high drama of 2002

In the summer of 2002, things once again came to a head as the monsoon failed in both Karnataka

and Tamil Nadu. Reservoirs in both states fell to record low levels and inevitably tempers rose.The sticking point yet again, as in 199596 was how the distress would be shared between thetwo states. The tribunal had overlooked this crucial point when it gave the interim award and ithad returned once again to haunt the situation. Tamil Nadu demanded that Karnataka honour


24/80

24 | Page

the interim award and release to Tamil Nadu its proportionate share. Karnataka on the otherhand stated that the water levels were hardly enough to meet its own demands and ruled outreleasing any water in the circumstances that prevailed.

CRA meeting and the Supreme Court order

A meeting of the CRA was called on 27 August but the Tamil Nadu chief minister Jayalalithawalked out of the meeting. The focus now shifted to the Supreme Court which orderedKarnataka to release 1.25 billion ft of water every day unless CRA revised it. Karnataka startedthe release of water but pressed for another meeting of the CRA which was fixed for 8September. The Tamil Nadu Chief Minister this time boycotted the meet citing insufficient noticeas the reason. A minister from her cabinet, however represented Tamil Nadu. The CRA revisedthe Court's order from 1.25 billion ft to 0.8 billion ft per day.

This time however, the Karnataka government in open defiance of the order of the CRA, refusedto release any water succumbing to the large scale protests that had mounted in the Kaveri

districts of the state. Tamil Nadu aghast at the defiance, went back to the Supreme Court.Karnataka now resumed the release of water for a few days, but stopped it again on 18September as a protesting farmer committed suicide by jumping into the reservoir and theprotests threatened to take a dangerous turn.

The centre now stepped in and asked Karnataka to release the water. The SC meanwhile, inresponse to Tamil Nadu's petition asked the CRA for details of the water release and water levelsin the reservoirs. The CRA in turn ordered for the inspections of the reservoirs. While the CRAinspected the reservoirs in Karnataka, Tamil Nadu (on 23 September) flatly refused to grant thempermission to inspect its reservoirs. This move by Tamil Nadu Chief Minister, coupled with her

earlier walkout and boycott of the CRA meets, came in for severe criticism from all quarters. On30 September the Supreme court ordered Tamil Nadu to co-operate with the CRA and TamilNadu gave in.

Demonstrations

The flare up had by now, well and truly taken an ugly turn and there were accusations andcounter accusations being thrown all around in both states. The opposition parties in Tamil Nadutoo had jumped into the fray and at the same time joining Jayalalitha in stinging rebukes of boththe Centre and the CRA.

To add to all this, the dispute had already spilled onto the streets in the district of Mandya inKarnataka and was threatening to spread to other parts of the state too. Precipitating the matterson the streets, the SC ordered Karnataka on 3 October to comply with the CRA and resume therelease of water.

Karnataka once again refused to obey the orders of SC. Tamil Nadu slapped another contemptpetition on Karnataka and soon the issue degenerated into a 'free for all' with all and sundryfrom both states joining the protests. Soon, film actors and various other cross sections of societyfrom both states were on the streets. The belligerence soon hit a crescendo and even as some

groups in Tamil Nadu called for a stoppage of power from the Neyveli Power station toKarnataka as a tit-for-tat measure, a Pan-Tamil militant outfit (a month or so later) went aheadand blasted a major power transformer supplying power to the neighbouring states of Karnataka
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Jayalalithaahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Jayalalithaahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Jayalalithaa


25/80

25 | Page

and Andhra Pradesh.The Karnataka Chief Minister, Mr.S. M. Krishnaon the other hand, fearingthat the situation might spiral out of control, embarked on a padayatra from Bangalore toMandya. While some saw this as merely a gimmick, some, like U R Ananthamurthysaw it as agood faith effort to soothe tempers and joined him in the yatra.

Censure of both states by the Supreme Court

In the meanwhile, Tamil Nadu's contempt suit on Karnataka, came up for hearing on 1November. The Karnataka government, by now saw the spectre of a harsh rebuke and action bythe SC, and in a bid to salvage the situation, decided to resume the release of water; while at thesame time compensating its own farmers for the loss. The supreme court deferred the case to 15November and on 15 November, while reserving its comment on Karnataka, censured the TamilNadu Chief Minister for attacking the CRA and the Prime Minister and ordered Tamil Nadu totender an unqualified apology. Tamil Nadu complied with it and tendered the apology.

By now, with Karnataka's resumption of water release, compensation of its farmers and the first

signs of the arrival of the north-eastmonsoonin Tamil Nadu, frayed tempers were on the wane.A couple of months later, the Supreme Court in an exceptionally stinging censure, pulled up theKarnataka government for its defiance of the courts. The Karnataka Chief Minister tendered anunqualified apology and soon the dispute blew over. Most importantly and equallyunfortunately, once again the dispute had blown over without any agreement being reached onthe issue of 'distress-sharing'.

20032006

This section may require cleanupto meet Wikipedia's quality standards.

Please improve this section if you can. The talk page may containsuggestions. (December 2009)

The last four years haven't seen any major flare up in the dispute even though the summer of2003 saw a dry spell in both states. The monsoons in 2004, 2005 and 2006 was quite copious andthis helped a great deal in keeping the tempers calm. While the last 3 or 4 years have beenrelatively quiet as far as jingoistic voices are concerned, a flurry of development has been afoot inthe courts.

The term of the tribunal was initially set to expire in August 2005. However, in the light of themany arguments the court was yet to hear, the tribunal filed a request for extension of its term.The extension was granted and the tribunal's term was extended for another year untilSeptember 2006. Early in 2006, a major controversy erupted over the 'Assessor's report' that wasapparently 'leaked' to the press. The report had suggested a decision which Karnatakasummarily rejected. Another major controversy erupted when just a couple of months before theSeptember 2006 deadline, the tribunal recommended the formation of another expert committeeto study the 'ground realities' yet again. This was unanimously and vehemently opposed by allthe four states party to the dispute. The states contended that this move would further delay a

judgment which has already been 16 years in the making.

More than the disapproval of all the four states of the new expert committee that was proposed,the proposal turned out to be a major embarrassment for the tribunal. This was because, not onlywere the four states opposed to it, even the Chief Judge of the tribunal, Mr.?? was opposed to it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S._M._Krishnahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S._M._Krishnahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S._M._Krishnahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U_R_Ananthamurthyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U_R_Ananthamurthyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsoonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsoonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsoonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Cleanuphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Cleanuphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Stylehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Stylehttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kaveri_River_water_dispute&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kaveri_River_water_dispute&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kaveri_River_water_disputehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kaveri_River_water_disputehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kaveri_River_water_disputehttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kaveri_River_water_dispute&action=edithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Stylehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Cleanuphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsoonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U_R_Ananthamurthyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S._M._Krishna


26/80

26 | Page

However the other two assistant judges on the 3-man adjudication team, overruled the opinion ofthe main Judge. And all this was done in a packed courtroom and this led to petty bickering andheated arguments between the three judges in the packed courtroom. This left everyone in thecourtroom shocked and the Tamil Nadu counsel was moved to remark that it was embarrassingthat the judges probably needed help settling their own disputes before adjudicating on thedispute at hand. Nonetheless, the new expert committee was formed and carried out further

assessments. Subsequently, the extended deadline of the tribunal also passed and the tribunalwas given yet another extension.

Judgment

The Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal announced its final verdict on 5 February 2007. Accordingto its verdict, Tamil Nadu gets 419 billion ft (12 km) of Cauvery water while Karnataka gets 270billion ft (7.6 km). The actual release of water by Karnataka to Tamil Nadu is to be 192 billion ft(5.4 km) annually. Further, Kerala will get 30 billion ft and Puducherry 7 billion ft. Tamil Naduappears to have been accepting the verdict while the government of Karnataka, unhappy with

the decision, filed a revision petition before the tribunal seeking a review.

METRO RAIL PROJECT

CHENNAI: The proposed metro railway project for the city is on the fasttrack with the state government moving the center for clearances. Projectconsultant Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) is expected to submit a

draft by the month-end

Work on the partly elevated and partly underground metro railway linealong Annasalai and Poonamallee high road is expected to cost Rs.7,129 croreas per a brief project profile submitted by DMRC in December 2006. Based onthe report, the state government has started working on getting clearancesform the planning commission, the cabinet and various departments.

The metro rail will decongest the crowded road corridors in the inner city andoffer a more environment friendly mass transportation alternative for theburgeoning metropolis. Government sources say the first railway corridorfrom toll gate to Kamaraj Airport will cover 27.3km. There will be 22 stations.The second corridor from fort station to guindy will consist of 18 stationsalong the 21.8km stretch.

Once the government finalizes the DPR, work is expected to start from

January 2008 and get over within five-and-a-half years.


27/80

27 | Page

The elevated track will be mostly along Annaisalai, which is wide enough tohave a railway line along the median. In places such as Broadway, wherethere is not enough road width, it will be an underground line.

According to the DPR, corridor one will start from tollgate on tiruvotriyurhigh road. It will go past the railway cross near washermanpet station as anunderground line. It will cover Broadway and high court; go past the MUCgrounds and the central station (opposite the Moore Market Complex). Theunderground track will cross poonamalee high road and the cooum to enterAnnasalai near tarapore towers. The track will be elevated from the point itenters Annasalai till where it terminates at a station before the airportbuilding.

The second corridor, which starts from fort station, will enter poonamalleehigh road, to cover aminjikarai and Ann nagar Second Avenue. Theunderground line will take a turn at tirumangalam to touch koyambedu fruitmarket, CMBT and the inner ring road to terminate near the guindy suburbanrailway station. Here as well as the fort station and the station opposite theMoore market complex, will have passages to connect commuters fromsuburban lines to the metro rail corridors.

Mullaperiyar DamFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to:navigation,search

Mullaperiyar Dam

Official name Mullaperiyar Dam

Locale Kerala,India

Coordinates 93143N77839E9.52861N 77.14417E

Construction began 1887

Opening date 1895

Dam and spillways

Height 155 ft (47.24 m)

Length 1200 ft (365.76 m)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#mw-head#mw-headhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#mw-head#mw-headhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#mw-head#mw-headhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#p-search#p-searchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#p-search#p-searchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#p-search#p-searchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keralahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keralahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiahttp://toolserver.org/~geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Mullaperiyar_Dam&params=9_31_43_N_77_8_39_E_type:landmark_region:INhttp://toolserver.org/~geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Mullaperiyar_Dam&params=9_31_43_N_77_8_39_E_type:landmark_region:INhttp://toolserver.org/~geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Mullaperiyar_Dam&params=9_31_43_N_77_8_39_E_type:landmark_region:INhttp://toolserver.org/~geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Mullaperiyar_Dam&params=9_31_43_N_77_8_39_E_type:landmark_region:INhttp://toolserver.org/~geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Mullaperiyar_Dam&params=9_31_43_N_77_8_39_E_type:landmark_region:INhttp://toolserver.org/~geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Mullaperiyar_Dam&params=9_31_43_N_77_8_39_E_type:landmark_region:INhttp://toolserver.org/~geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Mullaperiyar_Dam&params=9_31_43_N_77_8_39_E_type:landmark_region:INhttp://toolserver.org/~geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Mullaperiyar_Dam&params=9_31_43_N_77_8_39_E_type:landmark_region:INhttp://toolserver.org/~geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Mullaperiyar_Dam&params=9_31_43_N_77_8_39_E_type:landmark_region:INhttp://toolserver.org/~geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Mullaperiyar_Dam&params=9_31_43_N_77_8_39_E_type:landmark_region:INhttp://toolserver.org/~geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Mullaperiyar_Dam&params=9_31_43_N_77_8_39_E_type:landmark_region:INhttp://toolserver.org/~geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Mullaperiyar_Dam&params=9_31_43_N_77_8_39_E_type:landmark_region:INhttp://toolserver.org/~geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Mullaperiyar_Dam&params=9_31_43_N_77_8_39_E_type:landmark_region:INhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keralahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#p-search#p-searchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#mw-head#mw-head


28/80

28 | Page

Mullaperiyar Damis constructed over theheadwatersof thePeriyar RiverinKerala,India.ThePeriyar National Park, Thekkady is located around the Periyar reservoir formed by thebackwaters of this dam. It is operated by the Government ofTamil Naduaccording to a 999-yearlease agreement made during erstwhileBritishcolonial rule.

Contents

1Name

2History 3Disputes

o 3.1Historical background of the disputeo 3.2Current status

4Notes 5Further reading

Name

The name is derived from a portmanteauof Mullaiyar and Periyar. As the dam is located afterthe confluence of the Mullayar and Periyar Rivers, the river and hence the dam came to be called

Mullaperiyar.

History

Periyar river is a west-flowing river of Kerala State. The river flows its full course entirely

through Kerala, and derives its water almost exclusively from catchment area (Drainage basin)inside the State. The dam stops the west flowing river to form a reservoir, which is alsoexclusively located in Kerala. From the reservoir, Tamil Nadu collects water to the eastern side ofWestern Ghats via a tunnel.

On 29 October 1886 a lease indenture for 999 years was made between Maharaja ofTravancoreand Secretary of State for India for Periyar irrigation works. The lease indenture inter aliagranted full right, power and liberty to construct, make and carry out on the leased land and touse exclusively when constructed, made and carried out all such irrigation works and otherworks ancillary thereto to Secretary of State for India (now Tamil Nadu). By another agreement

in 1970, Tamil Nadu was also permitted to generate power.

A first dam was built by the British Corps of Royal Engineers.After the first dam was washedaway by floods, a second stonework dam was built in 1895.

Impounds Periyar River

Reservoir

Creates Periyar Reservoir

Capacity 443.23 million cubic meter

Mullaperiyar Issue
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headwaterhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headwaterhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headwaterhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periyar_Riverhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periyar_Riverhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periyar_Riverhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keralahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keralahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keralahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periyar_National_Parkhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periyar_National_Parkhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thekkadyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thekkadyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rajhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rajhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rajhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#Name#Namehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#History#Historyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#Disputes#Disputeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#Historical_background_of_the_dispute#Historical_background_of_the_disputehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#Current_status#Current_statushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#Notes#Noteshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#Further_reading#Further_readinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portmanteauhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portmanteauhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drainage_basinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drainage_basinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drainage_basinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travancorehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travancorehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travancorehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corps_of_Royal_Engineershttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corps_of_Royal_Engineershttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periyar_Riverhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periyar_Riverhttp://www.kerala.gov.in/mulla/mullafinal.swfhttp://www.kerala.gov.in/mulla/mullafinal.swfhttp://www.kerala.gov.in/mulla/mullafinal.swfhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periyar_Riverhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corps_of_Royal_Engineershttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travancorehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drainage_basinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portmanteauhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#Further_reading#Further_readinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#Notes#Noteshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#Current_status#Current_statushttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#Historical_background_of_the_dispute#Historical_background_of_the_disputehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#Disputes#Disputeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#History#Historyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#Name#Namehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rajhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thekkadyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periyar_National_Parkhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keralahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Periyar_Riverhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headwater


29/80

29 | Page

The dam's purpose was to divert the waters of the west-flowing Periyar River eastward, takingthe water from the reservoir through a tunnel cut across thewatershedandWestern Ghatsto thearid rain shadow regions of Theni, Madurai District, Sivaganga District and Ramanathapuramdistricts of Tamil Nadu.[4] Although Kerala claims that the agreement was forced on the thenprincely State ofTravancore,presently part of Kerala, the pact was revalidated in 1970 by Keralaand Tamil Nadu. The lease provided the British the rights over "all the waters" of the

Mullaperiyar and itscatchment basin,for an annual rent of Rs. 40,000.

Disputes

The government of Tamil Nadu has proposed an increase in the storage level of the dam from thecurrently maintained 136 feet (41 m) to 142 feet (43 m). The Kerala government has opposed thismove, citing safety concerns for the more than hundred year old bridge and especially for thethickly populated districts downstream. A 10-million-dollar 3D Hollywood movie inspired bythese controversies, titledDam 999,is scheduled for release in 2011.

Historical background of the dispute

A lease deed was signed between the Travancore Princely State and British Presidency of Madrasin 1886 which gave the British the right to divert "all the waters" of the Mullaperiyar and itscatchment to British territory (the Madras Presidency, now Tamil Nadu) for 999 years. AfterIndependence, both the entities became non-existent. Further, according toIndian IndependenceAct 1947,all the treaties between British Government and Indian Princeley States have lapsed.Moreover, Article 131 of the Constitution of Indiadenies Supreme Court of jurisdiction on pre-

constitutional agreements. Kerala argued that the agreement is not an equal one, but imposed onthe local King by the mightly British Empire.

After independence, even in the absence of any treaties, Tamil Nadu continued to use the waterfrom Periyar for extending irrigation facilities, and later for power generation on the basis ofinformal agreements between the governments of the two states. In 1970 the Kerala and TamilNadu governments signed a formal agreement to renew the 1886 treaty almost completely. TheIdukki Hydroelectric project, located 30 km downstream was completed in 1976 by the Keralagovernment, is still the major resource (about 30%) for irrigation and electricity needs of Kerala.After Independence the areas downstream of the Mullaperiyar become heavily inhabited, as

Kerala has a very high population density. In 1979, safety concerns were raised by KeralaGovernment after a minor earthquake, after which a few leaks were detected in the Mullaperiyardam. A state agency had reported that the structure would not withstand an earthquake abovemagnitude 6 on theRichter scale.The then Tamil Nadu government lowered the storage level tothe current 136 feet (from 142.2 feet) at the request of the Kerala Government to carry out safetyrepairs, after which it was suggested that the storage level could be raised to the full reservoirlevel of 152 feet (46 m). Security concerns regarding the downstream inhabitants promptedKerala to backtrack on the 1970 Agreement in 2000. Another argument put forward by Kerala onthe basis of a report on a study conducted state agencies suggested that the loss of habitat to thefauna of Periyar National Park would occur due to flooding after the increase in the storage level.

IIT Delhi conducted a study which stated that the dam safety would be affected even at a level of136 ft (41 m). IIT Roorkee conducted structural stability study on the Reservoir had found thatthe structure would not be safe in the event of an earthquake.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_dividehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_dividehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_dividehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Ghatshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Ghatshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Ghatshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thenihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thenihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madurai_Districthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madurai_Districthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sivaganga_Districthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sivaganga_Districthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramanathapuramhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramanathapuramhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#cite_note-3#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#cite_note-3#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#cite_note-3#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travancorehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travancorehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travancorehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drainage_basinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drainage_basinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drainage_basinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dam_999http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dam_999http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dam_999http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Independence_Act_1947http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Independence_Act_1947http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Independence_Act_1947http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Independence_Act_1947http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idukki_Damhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idukki_Damhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richter_scalehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richter_scalehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richter_scalehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richter_scalehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idukki_Damhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Independence_Act_1947http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Independence_Act_1947http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Independence_Act_1947http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dam_999http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drainage_basinhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travancorehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#cite_note-3#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramanathapuramhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sivaganga_Districthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madurai_Districthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thenihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Ghatshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_divide


30/80

30 | Page

Meanwhile, the Tamil Nadu government had increased its withdrawal from the reservoir, withadditional facilities to cater to the increased demand from newly irrigated areas. One articleestimates that "the crop losses to Tamil Nadu, because of the reduction in the height of the dam,between 1980 and 2005 is a whopping Rs. 40,000 crores. In the process the farmers of theerstwhile rain shadow areas in Tamil Nadu who had started a thrice yearly cropping pattern hadto go back to the bi-annual cropping."

However, the Kerala Government maintains that this is not true. During the year 1979-80 thegross area cultivated in Periyar command area was 171,307 acres (693.25 km2). After the loweringof the level to 136 ft (41 m), the gross irrigated area increased and in 1994-95 it reached229,718 acres (929.64 km2).

An article written in 2000 in Frontline stated: "For every argument raised by Tamil Nadu insupport of its claims, there is counter-argument in Kerala that appears equally plausible. Yet,each time the controversy gets embroiled in extraneous issues, two things stand out: One isKerala's refusal to acknowledge the genuine need of the farmers in the otherwise drought-prone

regions of Tamil Nadu for the waters of the Mullaperiyar; the other is Tamil Nadu's refusal to seethat it cannot rely on or continue to expect more and more from the resources of another State tosatisfy its own requirements to the detriment of the other State. A solution perhaps lies inacknowledging the two truths, but neither government can afford the political repercussions ofsuch a confession".

Current status

Tamil Naduis the custodian of the dam and its surrounding areas. In 2006, theSupreme Court ofIndia has allowed for the storage level to be raised to 142 feet (43 m). However, the Kerala

Government promulgated a new "Dam Safety Act" against increasing the storage level of thedam, which has not been objected by the Supreme Court. Tamil Nadu challenged it on variousgrounds. The Supreme Court issued notice to Kerala to respond; however, did not stay theoperation of the Act even as an interim measure. The Court then advised the States to settle thematter amicably, and adjourned hearing in order to enable them to do so. The Supreme Court ofIndia termed it as not unconstitutional. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court constituted aConstitution bench to hear the case considering its wide ramifications. The case involves pre-constitutional agreement between two entities which does not exist now.

Kerala's Stance: Kerala did not object giving water to Tamil Nadu. Their main cause of objection

is the dams safety as it is as old as 110 years. Increasing the level would add more pressure to behandled by already leaking dam. No masonry dam may survive for 999 years so a new dam mayreplace the existing one in near future.

Tamil Nadu's Stance: The State want that the 2006 order of Supreme court be implemented so asto increase the water level to 142 feet (43 m).

In September 2009, the Ministry of Environment and Forests of Government of India grantedenvironmental clearance to Kerala for conducting survey for new dam downstream. Tamil Naduapproached Supreme court for a stay order against the clearance; however, the plea was rejected.

Consequently, the survey was started in October, 2009. The survey team looked at three spotsand the final report is expected to be ready by March 2010 for submission to the government.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frontline_(magazine)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frontline_(magazine)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Keralahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Keralahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Keralahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Keralahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Keralahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_of_Keralahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Naduhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frontline_(magazine)


31/80

31 | Page

The arguments of Kerala and Tamil Nadu are continuing in the Constitution bench of SupremeCourt. Adv. Harish Salve appeared for Kerala and Adv. Parasaran appeared for Tamil Nadu inSupreme Court. Kerala argued that if Mullaperiyar is an interstate river, the Supreme Court hasno jurisdiction to intervene in the issue and that it must be dealt with by an independent tribunal.It also argued that if Mullaperiyar is an intrastate river, then the Dam Safety Authority of Keralais constitutional, and that the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to intervene in a pre-

constitutional agreement. Thus, the water provision is now done under the 1970 reviewagreement between the States. According to this agreement, only the dam area is leased to TamilNadu, and water is not leased. As Kerala does not gain anything from the project inside itsterritary, it is free to revisit/cancel the 1970 agreement. Kerala also argues that if the water levelis increased to 142 feets, wide forest areas that are inhabited by conserved flora and fauna will beinundated. Moreover, as Tamil Nadu controls only the dam, Kerala has no legal restrictions fordiverting water to Idukki reservoir through another route, thereby preventing water logginginside Mullaperiyar reservoir. When the Supreme Court sought to know whether a contractcould be unilaterally terminated, Mr. Salve said the Legislature had the competence to put anend to the contract, which was not in Keralas interest. By legislation, a contract could be varied,

altered or annulled.

Tamil Nadu argued that the Supreme Court need to look only in to the issue of non-implementation of Supreme Court Order to increase water level of dam by Kerala. Tamil Nadualso asserted that Mullaperiyar is not an interstate river, and thus, there is no need for forming atribunal. The Tamil Nadu counsel argued that Kerala has an ulterior motive to make a new damand keep it under its control. Tamil Nadu fears that the water supply will be restricted if Keralabuilds a new dam and controls it.

However, political controversies arose in Tamil Nadu, as Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra

Kazhagam(MDMK) party andBJPaccused the Tamil Nadu counsel[23]is against the interests ofTamil Nadu and demanded the state government to remove him. Vaiko, General Secretary,MDMK, has called for a road blockade on May 28 to stop transport of foodgrains, vegetables andmilk to Kerala to protest its proposal to construct a new dam in place of the Mullaperiyar dam.

Meanwhile, Kerala proposed that a mechanism may be thought about to supply water to TamilNadu similar to the one employed for its supply of drinking water to Coimbatore under theSiruvani water supply scheme.

On 18 February 2010, the Supreme Court decided to constitute a five-member empowered

committee to study all the issues of Mullaiperiyar Dam and seek a report from it within sixmonths. The Bench in its draft order said Tamil Nadu and Kerala would have the option tonominate a member each, who could be either a retired judge or a technical expert. The five-member committee will be headed by former Chief Justice of India A. S. Anand to go into allissues relating to the dam's safety and the storage level. However, the ruling party of TamilNadu, DMK, passed a resolution that it not only oppose the apex court's decision to form thefive-member committee, but also said that the state government will not nominate any memberto it. Tamil Nadu Chief MinisterM. Karunanidhisaid that immediately after the Supreme Courtannounced its decision to set up a committee, he had written to Congress president asking theCentre to mediate between Kerala and Tamil Nadu on Mullaperiyar issue. However, Leader of

OppositionJ. Jayalalithaaobjected to the TN Government move. She said that this would giveadvantage to Kerala in the issue. Meanwhile, Kerala Water Resources Minister N. K.Premachandran told the state Assembly that the State should have the right of construction,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marumalarchi_Dravida_Munnetra_Kazhagamhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marumalarchi_Dravida_Munnetra_Kazhagamhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marumalarchi_Dravida_Munnetra_Kazhagamhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharatiya_Janata_Partyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharatiya_Janata_Partyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharatiya_Janata_Partyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#cite_note-22#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#cite_note-22#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#cite_note-22#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V._Gopalswamyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V._Gopalswamyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adarsh_Sein_Anandhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adarsh_Sein_Anandhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._Karunanidhihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._Karunanidhihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._Karunanidhihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Jayalalithaahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Jayalalithaahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Jayalalithaahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N._K._Premachandranhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N._K._Premachandranhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N._K._Premachandranhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N._K._Premachandranhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N._K._Premachandranhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N._K._Premachandranhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Jayalalithaahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M._Karunanidhihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adarsh_Sein_Anandhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V._Gopalswamyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mullaperiyar_Dam#cite_note-22#cite_note-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bharatiya_Janata_Partyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marumalarchi_Dravida_Munnetra_Kazhagamhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marumalarchi_Dravida_Munnetra_Kazhagamhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marumalarchi_Dravida_Munnetra_Kazhagam


32/80

32 | Page

ownership, operation and maintenance of the new dam, while giving water to Tamil Nadu on thebasis of a clear cut agreement. He also informed the media that Former Supreme Court Judge Mr.K. T. Thomas will represent Kerala on the expert panel constituted by Supreme Court. On 8March 2010, in a fresh twist to the Mullaperiyar Dam row, Tamil Nadu told the Supreme Courtthat it was not interested in adjudicating the dispute with Kerala before the special empoweredcommittee appointed by the apex court for settling the inter-State issue. However, Supreme

Court refused to accept Tamil Nadu's request to scrap the decision to form the empoweredcommittee. SC also criticized the Union Government on its reluctance in funding the empoweredcommittee.

Notes

1. Which now does not exist as a river as it is part of the backwater/reservoir.2.

The main river is called the Periyar River.3. Which were under British rule as part of Madras Province.4. R. Krishnakumar, Frontline, Volume 23 - Issue 05, Mar. 11 - 24, 2006.

5.

"A film based on Mullaperiyar dam issue".Indian Express. Feb 28, 2010.6. "Verdict on Mullaperiyar".The Hindu(Chennai, India).7. in 19598.

CESS, Centre for Earth Science Studies, Thiruvananthapuram9. A study on the impact of raising of water level in the Mullaperiyar reservoir of the Periyar Tiger

Reserve was carried out by scientists from the Kerala Forest Research Institute (KFRI), the TropicalBotanic Garden and Research Institute (TBGRI), Centre for Water Resource Development andManagement (CWRDM) and theSlim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History(SACON)

10."Apex court wants reports on Mullaperiyar dam safety referred to expert body". The Hindu(Chennai, India). February

Mullaiperiyar Dam controversy: issues and concerns

Interestingly, mullaiperiyar dam controversy is not about sharing wateras in the cause of cauvery. Kerala, and way, cannot use the dam water asmost of it is going to the sea and kerala is least bothered about use of waterthat flows through the dam. It is also not a case of rehabilitation, at le3ast ason date, as in case of Narmada. Vast areas that would be submerged ifreservoir level were increased are the Periyar Tiger Reserve and it is a

different matter of concern altogether of protecting forest species. It is noteven the question of increasing height of the dam because the original storagelevel was 152ft, which was reduced to 136ft in the backdrop of mild tremor tothe magnitude of 2 on Richter scale in the region in 1979.

Still, the tempers are running high on both states, if not to the level ofconfrontations and clashes, because, it is a matter of providing livelihood toseveral lakhs of people and of increasing agricultural productivity in the rain

shadow districts of TamilNadu that would benefit out of water flow, whichotherwise goes water, by increasing the reservoir level. On the other hand, itis a matter of environmental concern for kerala that would like to avoid
http://expressbuzz.com/entertainment/Malayalam/a%20film%20based%20on%20mullaperiyar%20dam%20issue/152072.htmlhttp://expressbuzz.com/entertainment/Malayalam/a%20film%20based%20on%20mullaperiyar%20dam%20issue/152072.htmlhttp://www.hindu.com/fline/fl2305/stories/20060324004210600.htmhttp://www.hindu.com/fline/fl2305/stories/20060324004210600.htmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A1lim_Ali_Centre_for_Ornithology_and_Natural_Historyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A1lim_Ali_Centre_for_Ornithology_and_Natural_Historyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A1lim_Ali_Centre_for_Ornithology_and_Natural_Historyhttp://www.hindu.com/2009/02/12/stories/2009021260220800.htmhttp://www.hindu.com/2009/02/12/stories/2009021260220800.htmhttp://www.hindu.com/2009/02/12/stories/2009021260220800.htmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A1lim_Ali_Centre_for_Ornithology_and_Natural_Historyhttp://www.hindu.com/fline/fl2305/stories/20060324004210600.htmhttp://expressbuzz.com/entertainment/Malayalam/a%20film%20based%20on%20mullaperiyar%20dam%20issue/152072.html


33/80

33 | Page

bursting or breaking of the 110 years old, 175ft high, 5704ft long lime andbrick dam in question, kerala, being a land-locked state, appears to be overcautious. The state being land hungry and environmental imbalancesnowballing into imbalance in and destabilization of irrigation and, in turn,agrarian economy also cannot be ruled out. Kerala appears to be moreconcerned about the consequences inland than about the Mullaiperiyar damas such.

TamilNadu went to the Supreme Court and succeeded in convincingthe court to pass an order, in February 2006,in its favour to increase the heightof the reservoir level of the dam to142ft from the present 136ft. keralacountered it by moving swiftly to the extent of holding a special two-dayassembly session in march to discuss the issue and unanimously passed alegislation, kerala irrigation and water conservation ( Amendment) act, 2006in order to steal away the basis of the Supreme Court order. The amended acthas empowered the kerala dam safety authority to fix maximum reservoirlevel for scheduled dams and to instruct custodians of the dam accordingly.In this case, mullaiperiyar is a scheduled dam and custodian is the Tamilnadustate government. When the kerala government approached the court forrevision of its order, the Supreme Court rejected it and has advised talksbetween the two governments. Talks that have been on for last few monthsappear not to have yielded desired results and it is only a matter of time forthe Tamilnadu state government to approach the court to enforce the verdict.

The kerala government is coming up with the issue of safety of the 110-year-old dam and the consequent issues that are expected to affect more the35 lakh people living in downstream in the districts of idukki, kottayam,erunakulam, pathananmathitta and alappuzha. Tamilnadu, on the other

hand, is raising the issues of irrigation and drinking water in the rain shadowdistricts of theni, dindigul, madurai virudhunagar, sivaganga andramanathapuram which would otherwise have no access to any waterfacilities.

Tamilnadu claimed to have lost 45000 crores in the last 25 years becausemore than 8000 hectares of land went dry way of reduction in the originalreservoir level of 152ft.

As the kerala government said that the dam is so weak that it cannotwithstand storage level of more than 136ft, an expert committee was formed


34/80

34 | Page

to study the technical feasibility and ways to strengthen the ailing dam. Aftersome modification, renovation and repair works were carried out; the expertcommittee inspected the dam and has certified that the dam can withstand areservoir level of 142ft initially. But the kerala government is not ready to buythe argument and insists that the reservoir level should not be increased atany cost.

The center of earth science studies in kerala says that the dam cannotwithstand an earthquake of the magnitude of 6 or more on the Richter scale ifthe epicenter is near the dam. The institute also assessed that tremor of such amagnitu

Documents

Interview 2015 Group II