The Supreme Court on Monday (October 12, 2026) questioned Tamil Nadu on how Karnataka could be expected to make good the backlog in the release of Cauvery water when the latter was itself grappling with water scarcity and drought conditions.
“A backlog can be covered only when there is excess water. If there is less rainfall and there is scarcity, how do you expect them to fulfil the backlog? They are also reeling from water scarcity. If they have excess water and are not giving it to you, then only can you recover the backlog,” a Division Bench headed by Justice Vikram Nath observed.
The Bench reserved its order on an application filed by Tamil Nadu in the decades-old Cauvery water-sharing dispute. The State has contended that there is a shortfall of 11.719 thousand million cubic feet (tmcft) in the flows due to it at Billigundulu, the inter-State border measuring point, up to October 6.
The State also accused Karnataka of withholding water despite having sufficient reserves, pointing to a combined reservoir storage of approximately 49 tmcft, which it maintained was adequate to meet its water-sharing obligations to the lower riparian State.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Tamil Nadu, argued that deficient rainfall could not mean that one State alone should bear the brunt of the resulting shortage. He submitted that in a distress year, the available water must be apportioned proportionately among the States, and that Tamil Nadu continued to face a deficit of 11.719 tmcft even after its entitlement was reduced to account for the prevailing conditions.
“In a distress year, you cannot get the same [quantity] as in a normal year. So there has to be a proportionate reduction from the full flow to a distress flow. Even in the distress flow, the backlog is 11 tmcft,” Mr. Rohatgi submitted.
‘Shortfall of 11 tmcft’
The court was told that the continuing shortfall was severely affecting Samba cultivation and the livelihoods of farmers in the Cauvery Delta.
Comments
0 commentsNo comments yet — be the first.