Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Lok Sabha Debates

Discussion Regarding Sharing Of Inter-State River Water Between Andhra Pradesh ... on 4 August, 2003

ont> 14.03 hrs. DISCUSSION UNDER RULE 193 Sharing of inter-state river water between Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka Title: Discussion regarding sharing of inter-state river water between Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka (Not concluded).

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: We will now take up the next item – Discussion under Rule 193 regarding sharing of inter-State river water between the States of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka. Shri K. Yerrannaidu to initiate the discussion.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU (SRIKAKULAM): Mr. Deputy-Speaker, Sir, to begin with, I would like to say that I am grateful to you for giving me this opportunity to invite the attention of this august House and the Central Government to an explosive issue which stands to threaten the federal character of our polity and its constitutional scheme of things. It is the omissions and commissions of the Karnataka Government in respect of sharing water with Andhra Pradesh.

With your permission, I rise to plead for justice for the people of Andhra Pradesh who have been denied the real sharing of water. I rise to plead on behalf of many lakhs of farmers as also other people who have been denied drinking water. Andhra Pradesh is a constituent State of India, which is a Union of States. It is described as such in our Constitution. The crux of the matter is that our neighbour, the Karanataka Government, which is ruled by the Congress Party, is blatantly violating the constitutional scheme of things, the norms of sharing water, the resolution of inter-State river water disputes. This is resulting in untold misery to the people of my State.

India is a vast country served by many rivers. There are 20 major river basins, out of which 12 are major ones. About 83 per cent of the geographical area is situated in inter-State basins. The point is that common understanding and cooperation is required among the States.

Water is life water is for sharing, water is for conservation and water is needed for industry. Throughout the world, water has emerged as a scarce commodity.

In recent days, learned people have been talking about future wars being fought for water. Our good neighbour Karnataka has almost created such a situation.

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA (CANARA): They have already started it.

MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Madam, you will get your own share.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : But as responsible constituents of Indian Union, we are approaching the custodians of Constitution for justice. We have submitted a Memorandum to the hon. President, to the hon. Prime Minister and the hon. Water Resources Minister and we pleaded with the Chief Minister of Karnataka and finally we are pleading here before this august House.

Briefly, our problem, as you know, is regarding the Bachawat Award. The salient features of the Bachawat Award is that the River Krishna is an inter-State river flowing across the States of Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. As per the provisions of the Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956, the Tribunal was constituted. The Government of India has notified the Tribunal Award in the year 1976. According to the Bachawat Award, each State shall not utilise more than their allocations. This is the mandatory provision. As per the State-wise allocation, Maharashtra gets 585 TMC, Karnataka gets 734 TMC, Andhra Pradesh gets 811 TMC. In the Bachawat Award, they have given the allocations and they have also given the restrictions as to how to use the surplus waters. These are the allocations made by the Bachawat Award. According to this award, they have given basin-wise restrictions. The main problem lies with the Tungabhadra Basin. In Tungabhadra Sub-Basin, Karnataka shall not use more than 305.86 TMC. This is the en bloc allocation. According to this Bachawat Award, under K-8 Basin, they shall not utilise more than 305.8 TMC in the particular basin. For that also, the Bachawat Award has given project-wise allocations under the Tungabhadra Basin. They are, for TBRB LLC, it is 22.50 TMC, for TBRB HLC, it is 17.50 TMC, for Raya and Basavanna Channels it is 7 TMC, for Vijaynagar channel it is 2 TMC, for RDF, it is 0.9 TMC. The total allocation under T.B. Dam is 151.49 TMC. Now, they have to utilise the remaining water of 154.37 TMC from Tungabhadra Basin itself. That is what the Bachawat Award says. So far, approved projects by the Central Water Commission in Tungabhadra Basin taken up by Karnataka are 12 projects under Upper Tunga and for utilisation of 154 TMC of water. For the Tungabhadra Dam project-wise allocation is 154.37 TMC. The projects approved by CWC in the Tungabhadra Basin is for utilisation of 154 TMC. The balance water available is only 0.37 TMC. Now, in the light of the facts explained by me now, Karnataka have taken up the following projects taken up illegally violating Krishna Water Tribunal Awards. They are, Upper Tunga Project for use of 12.24 TMC, Singatlur/ Himmagi for use of 18.55 TMC, Basapur Lift for use of 0.60 TMC, Sasalwad Lift for use of 0.55 TMC, T.B. Damforeshore Lift for use of 2 TMC, Upper Bhadra for use of 42 TMC. For Upper Bhadra, recently the Government has given notification for survey and we have also completed the survey for use of 42 TMC. The total put together comes to 75.94 TMC. I am asking, through you, the Central Water Resources Minister, according to the Bachawat Award, whether they have entitled to utilise 305.86 TMC or not.

They have given projectwise allocation under Thungabhadra Dam to utilise 151.49 TMC of water. They have been given permission by the Central Water Commission to utilise 154 TMC of water. The balance is 0.37 TMC. Now, they are planning to take up projects to utilise another 75.94 TMC of water, but the available water is only 0.37 TMC. Is this not an illegal construction? Is this not a violation of the Bachawat Award?

Sir, the Government of Karnataka has to follow constitutional norms and obligations under article 262 of the Constitution which deals with inter-state river water disputes. Suppose they construct dams to utilise more water than they are allocated, the downstream flows will be reduced. Finally it will affect Thungabhada dam also. Thungabhadra Dam relates to both the States. About 60 per cent of the ayacut area under Thungabhadra Dam relates to Andhra Pradesh. If they construct more dams to utilise more water than they are allocated under Thungabhadra Sub-Basin, the inflows into Thungabhada Dam will be reduced and finally the State of Andhra Pradesh will suffer a lot. Is this not a violation of the Bachawat Award?

Sir, the Government of Karnataka has given some figures to the Central Water Commission to get permission to construct Upper Thunga Dam. They have submitted one set of figures to the Central Water Commission and another set of figures to the Supreme Court. So, based on the figures given by the Government of Karnataka, the Central Water Commission has approved the Upper Thunga project. They filed OS1 in the year 1997 in the Supreme Court. The Government of Andhra Pradesh has also filed OS2 in 1997 regarding utilisation of water. At that time, the Supreme Court asked all the three concerned States about utilisation of water under all the projects in their respective States. The Government of Karnataka has submitted their figure in respect of utilisation of water. According to those figures, as per the approved projects in Thungabhadra Basin, their utilisation is 154 TMC of water. The maximum utilisation is 190.69 TMC.

These are the figures given by the Government of Karnataka to the Supreme Court. According to facts and figures given by the Government of Karnataka to the Supreme Court in the year 1977-78, their entitlement is 295 TMC of water, but they have used 305 TMC. In the year 1978-79, their entitlement was only 295 TMC, but they utilised 304.92 TMC and from 1979 up to 1982-83, they utilised more water than they had been allocated. After 1982-83, if we add 7.5 per cent of regeneration of water in Krishna Basin, it comes to 10.86 TMC and so the total allocation in the Thungabhadra Basin comes to 305.86 TMC. By the construction of all these projects in the Thungabhadra Basin, the downstream projects will be affected. So, this is a complete violation of the Bachawat Award.

Sir, last year, the 100-year old Krishna delta did not get even a single drop of water and same was the case with Nagarjunasagar and Srisailam Reservoirs. Even now, the Government can send a team to find out the actual position. There is not a single drop of water in all these reservoirs. Now, they are talking about surplus water. For using the surplus water also, the Bachawat Tribunal has given a clear-cut Award. Clause 5 (A) of the Award deals with the State of Maharashtra, Clause 5 (B) deals with the State of Karnataka and Clause 5 (C) deals with the State of Andhra Pradesh. Clause 5 (C) of the Bachawat Tribunal Award states:

"The State of Andhra Pradesh will be at liberty to use in any water- year, the remaining water that may be flowing in river Krishna but thereby it shall not acquire any right whatsoever to use in any water- year nor be deemed to have been allocated in any water-year water of the river Krishna in excess of the quantity specified hereunder…"

 

 So, they have given a clear-cut Award stating that the State of Andhra Pradesh can use the surplus water. Why have they done so? It is because they have calculated it according to 75 per cent availability of water. Every four years, there is no water for one year. Who is the sufferer? The State of Andhra Pradesh is the sufferer. Andhra Pradesh is the lower riparian State and we will get water only if Maharashtra and Karnataka release water from their reservoirs. A discussion on this subject took place in the Rajya Sabha also and there the MPs belonging to Karnataka asked about illegal construction of reservoirs in Andhra Pradesh.

The Bachawat Award has given a clear-cut judgement regarding these surplus waters. … (Interruptions)

You will also have an opportunity. I will cover all the points one by one. I am talking about the water from Tungabhadra Dam. As far as utilisation is concerned, they have given 320 TMC from the Tungabhadra Dam. The entitlement in K-8 sub-basin is 295 plus 10.86 = 305.86 TMC. As a measure of protection to the users under the Tungabhadra Dam, a special circumstance is defined in clause IX(E)(1)(C). As per this Clause, if in any water year the Tungabhadra Dam receives inflows sufficient to meet the full allocations to all the constituent projects of the Tungabhadra Dam and thereafter still water is left over, then after reserving the requirements of the month of June for all the projects for the succeeding year, as determined by the Tungabhadra Board, any balance left over thereafter can be utilised by Karnataka only from Tungabhadra Dam and not from Tungabhadra basin.

This is the Award given by the Bachawat Tribunal. This is mandatory. According to article 262 of the Constitution, they have to respect it.

Both Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka are neighbouring States. We have good cultural relations. We are cordial and peaceful. But as a neighbouring State, they are violating all the norms. They are stopping water to which we are entitled in Andhra Pradesh.

Now, I will come to Rajolibanda Diversion Scheme. That is also a part of Krishna. Regarding the RDS, there is a clear-cut violation. According to the Bachawat Award, they are entitled to 1.2 TMC. According to the Krishna Water Tribunal, they have allotted 17.20 TMC of water of Rajolibanda Diversion Scheme. Out of 17.20 TMC, Karnataka is entitled to only 1.20 TMC. But what have they done now? In the last 24 years, in Karnataka, they have utilised more than 46 times. For irrigation, they are entitled to 5,900 acres. So far, according to their particulars and according to their utilisation, they are cultivating 22,000 acres. We are not getting our allocation of ‘15.90’. Even in Mahabubnagar, from where Shri Jaipal Reddy comes, under the RDS, they are entitled to cultivate 87,500 acres. The Karnataka anicut has ‘5,879’. The allocation is 1.20 TMC. For Andhra Pradesh, it is 15.90 TMC. They have given a cushion. From Tungabhadra Dam, they can take 7 TMC . From river flows, they have to take 10.10 TMC. But so far, we have not been getting water since the inception of this project. This anicut was constructed in the year 1958. From that year onwards, we are not getting 15.90 TMC. That is why this is a clear and blatant violation by the Government of Karnataka. We have requested so many times that this anicut project should be transferred to the Tungabhadra Dam Management Control Board. But this is under the control of Government of Karnataka. This is a joint project. Out of this project, they are entitled to 1.20 TMC for 5,879 acres and we are entitled to 87,500 acres. We are entitled to 15.90 TMC. So far, the Government of India has not taken any decision for the last so many years. This is a clear-cut violation by the Government of Karnataka. We have shown the figures how they have violated through the Rajolibanda Diversion Scheme.

If they had taken it earlier, if they had transferred it to Tungabhadra Management Control Board, this would not have affected the State of Andhra Pradesh. Therefore, my demand is under RDS, immediately, without any further delay, this should be transferred to Tungabhadra Management Board, which is having representatives of both the States, and every State will get justice. But they are not doing it. This is in Krishna River Basin.

In Pennar River Basin also we are suffering a lot. Chitravati River is a tributary of Pennar River. Across Chitravati, they are constructing the Paragodu Project. On the Chitravati River, there are so many projects like drinking water project, small irrigation project, etc. which have been constructed long time back. Bhagvan Sri Sathya Sai Baba, everybody knows about him, has constructed drinking water project for about 750 villages. In the area of Shri Raj Shekhar Reddy, the CLP Leader in Andhra Pradesh Assembly, the Rajiv Gandhi Technology Mission depends on the Chitravati River and there are about 155 villages which depend on the Chitravati River for water. Around one thousand villages are taking water from the ground with the help of boring. But the Government of Karnataka has designed to construct Anaicut dam in the name of drinking water project. This is what they are saying.

This is the truth. Firstly, they have prepared an estimate, I can show this old estimate, designed for Bangarpally village for drinking water. It also includes 585 acres of irrigation land. Whenever the State of Andhra Pradesh raised objection to this, they stopped the water supply for irrigation purposes and they changed the project report showing it as drinking water supply. Both the reports are available.

Sir, in the Karnataka Legislative Assembly, the Irrigation Minister, Shri Kumarbangarappa made a statement on the floor of the House that with the construction of Anaicut dam across Chitravati River, near Paragodu in Bangarpally Taluka, in Pavar District in Karnataka around 37 TMC of water can be stored. On Tuesday, during Question Hour of the Legislative Assembly, the above reply was given by the Minister on the question raised by Shri Sampandy, MLA. He stated that water would be available not only for drinking water supply to Bangarpally and Gudibanga towns but also for irrigation of 589 acres of land. Is this not a violation of 1933 agreement? I am asking this to the Union Government. This is the reply given by the Irrigation Minister of Karnataka. What other evidence the Government of India requires to give instructions to stop Paragodu Project?

Sir, the availability of water is 100 million cubic feet. They are constructing this Paragodu Project, which is designed for 1378.1 million cubic feet. The Government of Andhra Pradesh has already constructed a project for drinking water for thousand villages. What will be the fate of that drinking water project?

I am asking the Union Government, what will happen to those villages. I am asking Shri S. Jaipal Reddy, the spokesman of the Indian National Congress. I am asking this to the former Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh, Shri N. Janaradhana Reddy. Is this not a violation? As the representatives of the Indian National Congress Party, they have to respond to this. They have to intervene in this. They have to do justice to the people. The Constitution is for everybody. They have to respect the State’s obligations. But they are silent on this. They are looking as silent spectators. This is not fair. Tomorrow, if the Congress comes to power, as a National Party, they have every right to intervene in this… (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Please take your seats. Very emotional issues are being brought by the hon. Members. If you want to say something, you can do so when you are given an opportunity to speak.

… (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Please do not disturb him.

… (Interruptions)

DR. S. VENUGOPAL (ADILABAD): Sir, they will also get an opportunity to speak… (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: This is what I am telling them. Please do not disturb him.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Sir, this is a clear violation. They are telling .…..* to everybody.

According to the Minister’s statement they are saying that they have designed it to supply drinking water… (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : Sir, he has used an unparliamentary word. … (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: If any unparliamentary word has crept in, I will expunge it.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : I have not used any unparliamentary word. … (Interruptions)

Sir, I am only telling what they said to the Government of India. … (Interruptions)

* Expunged as ordered by the chair MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Shri Muniyappa, when you get a chance, you can rebut it.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI K.H. MUNIYAPPA (KOLAR): Sir, only 0.137 … (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Shri Muniyappa, he is not yielding.

… (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Whatever unparliamentary word has gone on record, I will expunge.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : When they get the opportunity, they can also counter it. … (Interruptions)

They have given the report to the Government of India and CWC that said: "We are designing for the drinking water". This is what they said. On the floor of the House, the Minister’s statement was different. I am quoting that statement. They are not giving the correct figures to the CWC and even to the Government of India according to the agreements entered in 1892 and 1933. They entered into agreements between Andhra Pradesh and Madras Presidency; and Andhra Pradesh and Mysore State. But the Karnataka Chief Minister had written a letter to the Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister that the period of these two agreements is over and that these two agreements are void. The Government of India immediately reacted to that letter. The CWC wrote to the Government of Karnataka and said: "Until new agreements are in force, these two agreements will be in force." They had sent two letters. So, this is the truth.

Now, they have started the construction. The availability is 100 million cubic feet. If they construct 137 million cubic feet, where will we get water for Anantapur? Anantapur is the most backward districts in India. After Jaisalmer, Anantapur is getting low rainfall. This year, the Jaisalmer part is getting more rain than Anantapur. Even so many Karnataka MPs are telling about this fluoride and nitrate content in the water in Kolar. Even in Anantapur district, the fluoride and nitrate content in the water is more than the fluoride and nitrate content in the water in Kolar. That is why, Swamiji constructed the big drinking water project to provide drinking water to 750 villages. If you construct – the availability is 100 million cubic feet – 137 million cubic feet, where will we get water from? These projects are constructed according to these agreements. Tomorrow, if the Paragodu project is constructed by this capacity, then Andhra Pradesh drinking water schemes will all be in defunct, the people will suffer and they will not get a drop of water.

The Karnataka Government is acting as an independent nation. India is a Union of States. India is a federal democracy. The States of the Union are bound by the time-tested Constitution. They are bound by the legal Awards and agreements under the Constitution of India. We all abide by the Constitution of India. We are not supreme. The Tribunal’s Award is constitutionally valid. I have given this information regarding RDS violations and also about Paragodu project with documents and the Report. You see, everybody is watching the Karnataka Government as to what they are doing. Sir, frequently they are violating. The first project report prepared for Bagapalli village was for the irrigation of 585 acres. They designed the second report for two municipalities and 88 villages without changing the FTL level, without changing the gross storage and without changing the live storage. Only area irrigated has been changed and then, instead of irrigation, they added 88 villages and one more municipality. How have they calculated it? The Government of India has laid certain norms. Suppose if anybody wants to construct one drinking water project, they have to calculate the growth of the population but they have taken the growth of the population at two per cent for 2050; for 50 years they have taken this and nowhere in India it can happen. They acted against the Government of India directions. If anybody constructs any drinking water project, they have to take the average growth of population for 10 years or 20 years. So, misleadingly they changed the project report and in the name of irrigation, they changed it later to drinking water with the same design, with the same carrying capacity and with the intention to stop water to our water projects in Anantapur district .

Is this not a violation? If they are really interested in drinking water, we are not interested in preventing their getting drinking water. According to the 1933 agreement, for any drinking water project there need not be any consultation but your designs and your evil intentions were such that the first report related to drinking water and later irrigation was added to it. This is the statement of the Minister. What is your reply? Is this not a fact? That is why we are worried and the Andhra Pradesh Government has raised objections and it is only after that they have changed to drinking water projects.

The third one is the Manjira basin. Under the Godavari-Krishna water dispute settlement, they are entitled to only 17.4 tmc ft. of water. We have constructed across Manjira the Singur project, which feeds drinking water to the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad. Recently, we sent a team along the Manjira and we found that across Manjira they are constructing a lot of projects. Now, we are not getting water for Sigurur and ultimately the people of Hyderabad and Secunderabad will not get a single drop of water. I am submitting this with photographs. So, what evidence do you need? … (Interruptions)

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA (CHIKABALLAPUR): Sir, we know what is happening in Srisailam. Let him not mislead the House. … (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Shri Jalappa, your chance is coming next. Please have some patience.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Sir, I am just explaining the position. We are the sufferers. Ours is the lower riparian State. Water will not flow from Andhra Pradesh to Karnataka; water will come from Karnataka to Andhra Pradesh. If they leave water to flow, we will get water. Otherwise, we are the sufferers. Lakhs of people and lakhs of agriculturists in Andhra Pradesh are suffering without drinking water and water for irrigation. We are not seeking any favour from the Union Government, the CWC or from the Government of Karnataka. We are seeking constitutional justice.

My friend and former Cabinet colleague Shri Jalappa was quoting about illegal projects by the Government of Andhra Pradesh. Even Shri N. Janardhana Reddy is also sitting here. He knows everything. We see the objections of Karnataka. I have the responsibility to express our points of view on the objections raised by Karnataka with regard to some of our projects.

They have been speaking about the Telugu Ganga and the Srisailam Left Bank projects. The foundation for the Telugu Ganga project was laid by Shrimati Indira Gandhi in the presence of three Chief Ministers. Each State had to give five tmc ft. of surplus water to the State of Tamil Nadu. I need not say how the Government of Karnataka is respecting the Constitution, how they are respecting the Supreme Court directive and how they have respected the Cauvery Water Tribunal Award. Everybody in this country knows that in Karnataka there is no role for Constitution and they are not obeying the rule of law. The evidence shows that unfortunately they never care for Supreme Court judgements. On the one side, the Supreme Court gives a judgement; and, on the other, the Chief Minister takes out a padayatra. Is this a constitutional Government? Is it not the duty of the constitutional Government to implement the Supreme Court’s orders? If a court gives a judgement against a person in a criminal case, we are putting him in jail but here is a State Government that has denied the implementation of the directions of the Supreme Court. Since they want to have political power, they want to divert the attention and derive political mileage. That is why they are doing these things.

There are three basins that are very important for Andhra Pradesh. … (Interruptions)

       

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Shri Yerrannaidu, there are 22 hon. Members to speak. You have taken 35 minutes because you happen to be the initiator of the discussion.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : The Karnataka Government approached the Krishna Waters Disputes Tribunal about the surplus water. The Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal has given a clear-cut judgment. Then, they approached the Supreme Court where they filed OS 1997. Again, they have gone to the court. They filed Interlocutory Application in the year 2001. They have withdrawn it. The court has also given direction that if they have any complaint, then they could approach the Government of India and plead for the new Tribunal and that the surplus water should be utilised by Andhra Pradesh only. The Tribunal’s Award is there. So, I would like to request the hon. Minister to reply to their questions. This is the Tribunal’s judgment and we cannot question the Tribunal’s judgment. This is the judgment of the Krishna Waters Dispute Tribunal. … (Interruptions) This book is available with everybody. I am not speaking anything other than facts. I am speaking facts based on the Krishna Waters Dispute Tribunal Award.

So, my request as well as my State’s request to the hon. Minister is to implement the Bachawat Tribunal’s Award and stop Karnataka from depriving us of our rightful share in Krishna water. In this regard, our request is to cancel the CWC clearance to Upper Tunga Project in Karnataka. Why am I demanding it? … (Interruptions) They are entitled for only 305 TMC ft. of water and they have utilised more than 305 TMC ft. of water. They have given wrong figures to the CWC to obtain the clearance for Upper Tunga Project. So, those facts are proved and there should be no further inquiry in this regard. The Government of India should immediately cancel the CWC clearance. They should direct Karnataka, at once, to stop construction of all illegal projects like Singatlur Lift Irrigation, Basarpur Lift Irrigation, Sasalvad Lift Irrigation and Upper Bhadra Project. They have already given clearance for survey in Tunga Bhadra basin. They should direct Karnataka to stop unauthorised irrigation and excess drawals in RDS. The Government of India must transfer the Management Control of RDS from Karnataka to the Tungabhadra Board. The Board belongs to both the State Governments. So, in this way, we can get justice. They should direct Karnataka to strictly adhere to the Agreements of 1892 and 1933 and stop all illegal constructions in Pennar Basin. I have given these two reports to show as to how they have manipulated, how they designed and how they stored the water to do injustice to the State of Andhra Pradesh. So, that is also one of my demands. They should direct Karantaka to release water stored without any purpose in Almatti and Narayanpur Dams.

Last year in Andhra Pradesh, the delta under Nagarjunasagar Project was without water. The hon. Member, Shri Janardhana Reddy knows about it. The total ayacat of 37 lakh acres is not getting even a drop of water. There is no water even in the reservoir. There are no tunnels also. They are storing water in the Almatti Dam. There are not sufficient canals. They are storing water in Narayanpur Dam. That is why, the Bachawat Award has given a concession to the State of Andhra Pradesh to use surplus water. When there is excess water, then only it comes to Andhra Pradesh. That is why, the Supreme Court as well as the Krishna Waters Disputes Tribunal has given permission to the State of Andhra Pradesh to utilise this surplus water. They are asking as to how we are constructing projects. Can we carry this water in the buckets? So, nearly 20-30-40 TMC ft. of surplus water is unnecessarily going to the sea and wasted in the sea. How can we carry about 20-30-40 TMC ft. of water? Can it be carried in buckets? It is only through construction of projects that we are taking water. The Bachawat Tribunal has categorically said that we have not got any right. That is our responsibility. We are not getting any right. But what about the surplus water? We are only getting about 20 per cent of water. We are constructing projects and spending a lot of money. What is the problem for Karnataka? The river water flows from Karnataka to Andhra Pradesh and not from Andhra Pradesh to Karnataka. This is the wrong information they are giving to this august House.

Shrimati Sonia Gandhi, the National President of the Indian Congress, went to Anantapur. It is a drought-prone area. She saw the sufferings of the people. The people are not getting any water. In spite of the visit of the National President of the Congress (I), people are suffering, They are not intervening. … (Interruptions)

projects and spending a lot of money. What is the problem for Karnataka? The river water flows from Karnataka to Andhra Pradesh and not from Andhra Pradesh to Karnataka. This is the wrong information they are giving to this august House.

Shrimati Sonia Gandhi, the National President of the Indian Congress, went to Anantapur. It is a drought-prone area. She saw the sufferings of the people. The people are not getting any water. In spite of the visit of the National President of the Congress (I), people are suffering, They are not intervening. … (Interruptions)

Sir, the hon. Chief Minister of my State with leaders of all the Parties, including those of Congress, came to Delhi. We called on His Excellency the President of India, the hon. Prime Minister of India and the hon. Minister of Water Resources. We requested for appointment with Shrimati Sonia Gandhi as President of a national Party and we wanted to explain to her the details about Andhra Pradesh. But she denied appointment. … (Interruptions)

SHRI G.S. BASAVARAJ (TUMKUR): Sir, it is not correct. … (Interruptions)

SHRI S. JAIPAL REDDY (MIRYALGUDA): Sir, it is a matter to be decided by the Central Government. Please allow me to speak. … (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Shri Basavaraj, please take your seat.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Sir, Shrimati Sonia Gandhi, President of that national Party asked her Private Secretary to get the details. … (Interruptions) When the Chief Minister of Karnataka came to Delhi and submitted a memorandum to the President of India and the Prime Minister, a copy of the same was marked to Shrimati Sonia Gandhi. On that representation she asked her Private Secretary to call for the remarks and suggestions from the Government of Andhra Pradesh. We appreciate this as she is the President of the National Party. … (Interruptions) You are asking what is the concern of Shrimati Sonia Gandhi. I am asking Shrimati Sonia Gandhi as to in what context she is asking the Government of Andhra Pradesh to give details based on the representation given by Shri S.M. Krishna. I am asking you. … (Interruptions)

Sir, this is the letter which is written by the Private Secretary to Shrimati Sonia Gandhi to the Resident Commissioner of Government of Andhra Pradesh in Delhi and the Resident Commissioner in turn asked the information from the Chief Secretary of the State and other people. There is nothing wrong in it. She is the President of a national Party which is ruling in 15 States. … (Interruptions) Is this not her duty? They are violating the constitutional awards and agreements and everything. … (Interruptions) Is this not the responsibility of the Congress Party? How will they come to Andhra Pradesh tomorrow? Even the people of Andhra Pradesh are angry. … (Interruptions) The people of Andhra Pradesh are not getting even a drop of water. The people of Andhra Pradesh are angry. … (Interruptions)

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY (NARASARAOPET): The people are angry on you, not on me. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : No, the people are angry with you. … (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER : Shri Jaipal Reddy has already asked to intervene. He will intervene.

SHRI S. JAIPAL REDDY : Sir, hon. Member Shri Yerrannaidu referred to me personally, he referred to my Party and he referred to my leader. I am, therefore, obliged to offer a personal explanation. Here, I am not speaking in my capacity as spokesperson of the Party. I am a Member of Parliament from Andhra Pradesh like Shri Yerrannaidu is. As a Member of Parliament from Andhra Pradesh I broadly endorse the factual version of the case of Andhra Pradesh in regard to the river water issue. Having said this, I must say he has unnecessarily brought in the questions relating to the Congress Party. In this manner he is weakening his case and not strengthening his case. … (Interruptions)

As regards the interview they sought from the Congress President, let me state authoritatively that they sought an interview with the Congress President on a particular date at a particular time. That is not the way of seeking appointment; whereas the leaders of Karnataka, belonging to all Parties – not Congress alone but all Opposition Parties - sought time in a flexible way. I do not think the Congress President ever refused to meet anybody. … (Interruptions) But, having said this, Shri Yerrannaidu and others should know that the national Parties have no specific role to play. At best, they can guide. The role is to be played by the Government of India. This is the Government which is sustained by Telugu Desam Party and this Telugu Desam Party has miserably failed to get anything from this Government and to do justice to the people of Andhra Pradesh. … (Interruptions) You must see the importance of this matter.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : No, it is all wrong. … (Interruptions) Sir, in what context did Shrimati Sonia Gandhi intervene for Cauvery? When finally the Government of India and the Supreme Court warned the Government of Karnataka whether they want article 355 to be imposed on them, then Shrimati Sonia Gandhi intervened and they released some water. It came in the newspapers. In what context did Shrimati Sonia Gandhi intervene then? … (Interruptions)

SHRI S. JAIPAL REDDY : Soniaji never intervened in regard to Cauvery. … (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : Sir, I must say he is talking ...(Expunged as ordered by the Chair) … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Shrimati Sonia Gandhi asked her Private Secretary to get the information from the Government of Andhra Pradesh. I am asking you. ..… (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER : I would request the hon. Members from both the States of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh not to take this as between these two States.

Otherwise, you will be spoiling your case. The Central Government is there as a referee. Of course, the Minister will be giving the reply to the debate.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : If I am misleading… (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Shri Yerrannaidu, you have already taken 45 minutes. You will have to conclude now. There are 22 Members who want to speak on this issue, and I do not know how to accommodate them because after this, today, we have to take up one more discussion under Rule 193. Please conclude now.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : I will conclude by asking one straight question to Shri Jaipal Reddy: In what capacity did Shrimati Sonia Gandhi asked her Private Secretary to get information from Andhra Pradesh? In what capacity, did she ask for these comments?

Mr. Deputy-Speaker, Sir, even my Chief Minister is willing to meet Shrimati Sonia Gandhi. We want to bring all the facts to her notice and how the Karnataka Government is blatantly violating the Inter-State Agreements, Awards and everything. The Karnataka Government is a habitual offender. On the Cauvery issue, they did this with Tamil Nadu.

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: You have to conclude now because you have already taken 45 minutes.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : The Karnataka Government has now turned their head from the Cauvery Basin to the Krishna Basin, then to the Pennar and the Manjira Basins. It is feeling that it is a upper riparian State, but the Constitution will not agree with it. If they are violating like this, the Government of India should take immediate necessary action to cancel all the illegal projects. Otherwise, the people of Andhra Pradesh will not tolerate. If the National President of the Congress is silent and if Congress MPs are silent, then they will have to face the repercussions in Andhra Pradesh. If you go to Nagarjunasagar,the Krishna Delta, and Rayalaseema, you will find that the people are very furious because they are not getting any drinking water. Even during the rainy season, people are not getting any water. Today, in the morning, I received a telephone call from one of the Municipal Chairmen on this issue. This is the state of affairs in Andhra Pradesh, whereas our neighbouring State is storing water.

If you take the case of Almatti, there are no canals, so what will they do with the water? We are suffering from lack of water for drinking as well as irrigation, but they are storing water in Almatti. They are asking Andhra Pradesh as to why it is constructing all those projects. That is why, I would like to ask the Government of India to appoint an independent judicial team. With regard to Almatti, the Supreme Court favoured Andhra Pradesh. The Karnataka Government wanted to increase height of the dam up to 554 feet, but the Supreme Court asked the Karnataka Government not to raise it beyond 519 feet. We get justice from the Supreme Court and not from the Karnataka Government. When my Chief Minister requested the Chief Minister of Karnataka to limit the height of the Almatti Dam to 519 feet, he has turned a deaf ear. Finally, the Supreme Court ordered the Karnataka Government to stop the construction at 519 feet. This is the history of the Karnataka Government. They never care the Supreme Court judgments or the Awards.

Therefore, I am asking the Government of India, through you, Sir, to send a fact-finding team. If my figures are not correct, I will hold myself responsible. If my figures are correct, you should send a fact-finding committee immediately, cancel all the CWC clearances, and honour whatever demands were made by me. I am appealing, through you, Sir, that if my facts are correct, you should initiate immediate action, otherwise, it is not necessary. I am giving you the figures. Even the Karnataka Government has given the figures to the Supreme Court, which is the apex, highest court in India. They are cheating the CWC. They have given some other figures and got permission from them. Is it not blackmailing? Is it not violation? Are you happy with this process?

As a National President, has she got no responsibility? Even today, my Chief Minister is willing to meet Shrimati Sonia Gandhi.… (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Shri Yerrannaidu, you are taking half of the time allotted for this discussion. Only two hours have been allocated for this discussion.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Sir, thank you very much for giving me this opportunity. … (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: How am I going to accommodate all the Members? There are two discussions under the Rule 193 which are to be taken up today. You know that this has been decided in the Business Advisory Committee.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Mr. Deputy-Speaker, Sir, the Prime Minister is not here. Through you, I once again request the Prime Minister and the Minister of Water Resources to take immediate action and do justice to the people of the lower riparian State of Andhra Pradesh.

       

SHRI SHIVRAJ V. PATIL (LATUR): Sir, this is a matter which has to be decided by the CWC. It has to be looked into by the Tribunal. This matter can be looked into by the Supreme Court. Ultimately, the Union Government has to take a decision and has to do whatever is necessary in this matter. We can understand now the stand being taken by Shri Yerrannaidu’s party. They are politicising it. … (Interruptions) That is why they want to cover up their inefficiency in not being able to get anything from the Union Government to which they are extending their support. … (Interruptions) That is why they are blaming others. … (Interruptions) It has become very clear that this matter is being politicised.… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : That is why the representation of Congress party in Lok Sabha is diminishing.… (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: I appeal to all the Members to calm down. We have decided in the Business Advisory Committee meeting that two Discussions under Rule 193 would be held and that two hours’ time would be allotted to each Discussion. If you cooperate with the Chair, we can dispassionately discuss this.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Mr. Deputy-Speaker, Sir, Shri Shivraj Patil has said that I am politicising the issue. We wrote to Shrimati Sonia Gandhi asking for appointment. That is a fact. Here is the reply received from the Private Secretary to Shrimati Sonia Gandhi to our request. I ask Shri Shivraj Patil to say whether this is a fact or not. … (Interruptions)

SHRI SHIVRAJ V. PATIL : If somebody says I am coming to meet you on this date, at this time and you receive me, how does one respond? … (Interruptions) If information is sought in order to see that help is extended to the people of both the States, there is nothing wrong committed in that. On the contrary, the hon. Member is doing it. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : The Government of Karnataka is under the Congress regime now. That is why, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, Sir, we request her to intervene in the issue and do justice to the people of Andhra Pradesh. … (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: To do justice to the subject, one should be above politics.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI S. JAIPAL REDDY : The point is, Shri Yerrannaidu said that Congress President Shrimati Sonia Gandhi had referred the matter to the Government of Andhra Pradesh for clarification. When a memorandum is submitted to the President of a national party, it is the duty of the leader of that party … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : She has denied it. … (Interruptions)

SHRI S. JAIPAL REDDY : Shri Yerrannaidu, we are a bigger party, we could interrupt you but we did not.

SHRI KALAVA SRINIVASULU (ANANTAPUR): The Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh sought an appointment of Shrimati Sonia Gandhi but she refused it. … (Interruptions)

SHRI SHIVRAJ V. PATIL : You do not seek appointment saying, ‘I have fixed the time. I will come on such and such date, you receive me.’ This is no way of seeking an appointment. … (Interruptions)

SHRI S. JAIPAL REDDY : The Congress President has sought facts and observations of the Government of Andhra Pradesh. It is the will and pleasure of the Government of Andhra Pradesh to provide or not to provide that information. She performed her duty. It is not a question of her responsibility. When the matter is pending with the Government of India, why do they invoke the intervention of the President of another party? Why do they not invoke the intervention of BJP President Shri Venkaiah Naidu who hails from Andhra Pradesh?… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Such partisan attitude is unbecoming of a national leader. … (Interruptions)

SHRI A.P. JITHENDER REDDY (MAHABUBNAGAR): Sir, why do you allow a debate on this point. Please let the second speaker start his speech.

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA (CHIKABALLAPUR): Sir, Shri K. Yerrannaidu is a very good friend of mine… (Interruptions) we were both together in the Cabinet of Shri H.D. Devegowda and Shri I.K. Gujral… (Interruptions)

Sir, he is bestowed with two great gifts. One is that he has a large throat with loud noise and the second is that, he is in close proximity along with his Chief Minister, with the Centre.

Sir, it reminds me of Johnson’s words that "if you fail to shoot with the gun, beat with the butt of the gun." And, here, Shri Yerrannaidu is adopting the same tactic. He was talking about Paragodu. May I invite him to come to Paragodu and see it by himself?

Sir, the Rajiv Gandhi Water Commission long ago identified that there are 366 villages in Bagepalli taluk and 124 villages in Goduwada taluk including small towns, where water is polluted. It contains more than 46 per cent fluoride and 15 per cent nitrate. Thousands of people including children, elders, and the cattle have been mutilated with this Skeletal Fluorosis disease.

Sir, previously it was envisaged to provide irrigation for nearly 800 acres. But after seeing the dangerous situation prevailing in these two taluks, it was changed. These two taluks put together forms one Assembly segment, which falls into my constituency. Sir, after seeing those people’s suffering, I feel that we are in hell. I have felt their pain. It may not be out of the way if I mention that I had organised a free medical camp in Bagepalli about five to six months ago. Out of 6,000 people who had attended the camp, nearly 2,700 were suffering from the Fluorosis. Some had lost their teeth, some had lost their arms and some had lost their legs. All were bent.

After seeing their pathetic condition, I approached the Chief Minister and said: "Look here, Mr. Chief Minister. We shall forget about the irrigation. We will not fight with each other. We will use the water only for drinking purpose." Then, he made up his mind and gave the green signal to start the Paragodu project.

Sir, I want to ask my friends, ‘do they not think that it is inhuman to prevent such people having good potable water?’ When they started supplying water to Secundrabad and Hyderabad, we did not object. When they started supplying water to Tirupati, we did not object. We never objected. But now, they are objecting… (Interruptions)

Sir, for all these things, Paragodu is the basis. It is only because of Paragodu. They can sometimes twist the arms of the Government and they can sometimes twist the ears of the Government also.

Sir, that is why, immediately, Shri Yerrannaidu and their Chief Minister met the hon. Prime Minister. Then, he asked his officers to stop it. But when we complained that they were illegally diverting the water which was flowing to Madhugiri taluk and Pavagada taluk, why no teams were sent? It is because they are supporting them for all their misdeeds. That is why they are listening to them. We are not supporting them. That is why they do not listen to us… (Interruptions) It is a fact. They must know it… (Interruptions) I am not going to gain by telling all untruth here.

15.00 hrs. I am not going to gain anything by bringing all these things before this House.

… (Interruptions) I am not yielding. … (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: He is not yielding.

… (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Since he is not yielding, it should not go on record.

(Interruptions) … * * Not Recorded SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI (RAIGANJ): Sir, the hon. Member is using unparliamentary language. First of all, when a senior hon. Member from our side is speaking, how can he disturb? … (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Shri Dasmunsi, that is not going on record – whether parliamentary or otherwise.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : Sir, I am in politics for the last 40 years. I have an experience of 40 years in politics. I know what to speak and what not to speak. I do not require any advice from my dear friends from the other side. I do not require their advice. … (Interruptions)

SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI : Sir, what is this going on? He is interrupting again and again. How can he disturb the House like this? … (Interruptions)

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : What did our Chief Minister write to the hon. Chief Minister of Andhra, to the Government of India and to the Ministry of Water Resources? He said that it was purely for drinking water purposes and no irrigation project is being taken up, and that no canal and other things are provided. That should be taken in true spirit. But they disbelieve the Chief Minister and go on creating all these problems.

I must thank the Government of India; they sent a team of honest people and people with conscience. They visited the place and gave a good opinion. The hon. Minister has cleared it on the 22nd of last month. This itself belies all the complaints that were being made hitherto, and all the allegations that were being made hitherto. I would request the hon. Minister to form a Committee of this House; let it go and inspect all the projects about which they are complaining.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Your calculation is 2050. It is totally against the guidelines of the Government of India. … (Interruptions) We are not against having water for drinking water purposes. … (Interruptions) But your calculation is 2050; it is wrong. … (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Shri Yerrannaidu, he is referring to the report of the team. The hon. Minister is here to see whether it is right or wrong; he can refute if it is wrong. You do not worry about that. There is only one hour left for completing this debate. I request all of you to be patient.

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : Sir, I did not follow what he meant by 2050.

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Do you want to follow that? You are inviting trouble.

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : I want to know what is that 2050. What is that code number?o SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Sir, as Shri Jalappa correctly said, we are not against using water for drinking purposes. But what did they do? First they designed it for drinking water purposes, but diverted it for irrigation purposes. Shri Jalappa has admitted; for any drinking water project, there are Government norms to calculate population, etc. But their Government has calculated it for 50 years. If any project is calculated for 50 years, the whole fund of the Government would go. … (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Shri Yerrannaidu, whatever you say, he is refuting. The Government of India is here; the hon. Minister is here; he will reply to that.

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : We are spending Rs.9.66 crore. Do you know what is the storage of water? He was explaining in millions of feet. But simply speaking in ordinary terminology, it is 0.13 tmcf. The august House can understand how much water does 0.13 tmcf mean. … (Interruptions)

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Shri Yerrannaidu, please ask the Members of your Party not to disturb like this.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : Sir, I told you already that when they fail to see reasoning, they shout at us. That is it. I have already told you that.

Let us take the other projects. Then have this Telugu-Ganga project. It is true that the foundation stone was laid in the presence of three Chief Ministers by late Shrimati Indira Gandhi, for giving 15 tmcf of water for Chennai for drinking purpose.

We were prepared to contribute 5 TMC of water and the States of Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh also were to contribute 5 TMC each. Why has the channel been so designed that 1 TMC of water could be flown every day? What for are you taking this water? Is it not for irrigating the land. Have you taken permission of the Government of India or the Supreme Court? Was there any across the table conversation among the concerned three Chief Ministers? You have created a storage capacity of 164 TMC for Telugu Ganga. Was it necessary? Both Telugu Ganga and Srisailam left bank canal have not been approved by the Government of India till now. In spite of your twisting arms and ears, the Government of India has not approved it because sometimes it is reasonable. It can understand what is right and what is wrong. … (Interruptions)

15.06 hrs. (Shri Basu Deb Acharia in the Chair) DR. S. VENUGOPAL (ADILABAD): Permission is not required.… (Interruptions)

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : Both the States have one culture. Most of them speak Telugu and Kannada. I am also a Telugu man. I speak Telugu. Why are you creating this ill will between these two States? In Vijayanagar Samrajya, Krishnadevraya had ruled some of your areas. Why are you creating this ill will? Sir, they are doing this because their image among rural parts is sagging now. They want to create all these problems so that their image is somewhat built up. This is the fact.… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Please take your seat. Do not interrupt.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : Our former Chief Minister, Shri Bangarappa is here. Speaking about Krishna project, Shri Yerrannaidu has mentioned about Gauribidanur. It was an old barrage and was washed away in 1991 rains. Nobody could do anything for it. I had myself gone there and seen. I had approached the Government to restore it as it would cost only Rs.75-80 lakhs. It was reconstructed. It is not a new one.

Whenever their MPs or MLAs come, they come with black cats and with AK-47 rifles. We feel as if we have committed some theft with these people, we have stolen the property of Shri Yerrannaidu or other Members of his Party. We have not stolen anything from them, Sir. When my friend was talking about federalism, I was reminded of the idiom 'devil quoting scriptures'. On 27th of May, hon. Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh addressing the people at Tirupathi had said, ‘Prepare to wage war against Karnataka people’.… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : This is not correct at all.… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shri Yerrannaidu, please take your seat. Do not interrupt like this. You will get your chance.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : I am placing this newspaper on the Table of the House.… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : It was to wage war against water.… (Interruptions)

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : Wage war against whom? It is against Karnataka.

Sir, on 6th of June more than five thousand people along with two MPs and MLAs who reached Karnataka border failed to enter the Karnataka the border… (Interruptions) It was reported in the Press. We have the Press reports here. But still they speak of federalism. They wanted to smash all the missionaries and beat the people at the project site. But because of the presence of the police, nothing happened. Only three or four persons were arrested and they too were released the next day. Still, they speak of federalism.

DR. S. VENUGOPAL : Do not make allegations, please talk on the issue… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Please take your seat.

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : Sir, I am the last man to make any allegations. I have experience in this field. I have served thrice as Cabinet Minister in the State and once at the Centre. I have served as Presidents of various banks and institutions. These are the Press reports we have here… (Interruptions) Please do not try to silence my voice… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Please do not interrupt. When you get your chance, you reply to him.

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : Sir, I caution the hon. Prime Minister and the Central Government to stop such things that are going to destroy federalism. If this is going to be allowed for selfish reasons, then there will be end of federalism and the country would be split into pieces as it was there before Independence. For reasons of publicity we can speak anything here but facts are something else.

Sir, we can sit across the table. There is the Government of India, there is the Central Water Commission. The hon. Minister has said that the Krishna Tribunal is also going to be set up within a fortnight. Let that be formed and let things be settled at the level of the Government.

   

SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI : Sir, before you call the name of the next speaker, I have a submission to make. Many hon. Members, cutting across Party lines, are keen to speak on this subject and have given their names. But it has been decided in the BAC that another debate is to be taken up at 4 o’clock today. I feel, at least from our Party, that if all the Members do not get chance to speak within this specified time, then they should be allowed to lay their speeches on the Table of the House. Otherwise, it would be difficult for me to accommodate all the speakers within this limited time. You may call the names of the speakers as per your list, but if the debate has to be concluded within the specified time, then you may please allow the Members, who prepared themselves to speak but could not speak, to lay their speeches on the Table of the House. If this is not done, then I feel, it would be an injustice done to them.

MR. CHAIRMAN: This debate would have be concluded by 4 o’clock.

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : Sir, with due regard to my leader, I would like to submit that this is an important issue… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: It was decided in the BAC that this debate would be concluded by 4 o’clock including the reply by the Minister concerned.

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : Sir, the first speaker on the subject took about an hour… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Sir, if you see the precedents, the initiator of a debate under Rule 193 normally has spoken for about one hour to one and a half hours. This is an important matter and I have taken 45 minutes. There is nothing wrong in it. You please see the precedents.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The next matter, atrocities on dalits, is no less important. Anyway, we will decide about it at 4 o’clock.

श्री राम विलास पासवान (हाजीपुर) : सभापति जी, इस विषय में रामजीलाल सुमन और वभिन्न पार्टियों के लीडरों के साथ मैं भी स्पीकर साहब से मिला था और हमने कहा था कि यह उचित नहीं हैं कि दलितों के ऊपर एट्रोसिटीज पर डिस्कशन चार बजे रखा जाए, इससे उसकी गंभीरता खत्म हो जाती है। इसलिए हमने मांग की थी कि इसको जल्दी रखा जाए। जो मुद्दा चल रहा है उसके चार बजे तक खत्म होने की संभावना नहीं है। मैं आपसे आग्रह करुंगा कि दलितों पर एट्रोसिटीज का डिस्कशन कल नहीं तो परसों दो बजे के बाद करवाइये।

हम इस बात पर तैयार नहीं है कि अनुसूचित जाति और जनजाति के मामले सदन में ऑड आवर्स में विचार के लिए लिए जायें। हम लोगों ने इस बारे में अध्यक्ष महोदय से कहा था। उन्होंने इस पर अपनी सहमति में न कहा और साथ ही यह भी कहा कि हम लोग इस पर सदन में विचार करेंगे। यही मेरा आपसे आग्रह है।

               

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR (MANGALORE): Mr. Chairman Sir, we have heard submissions from the TDP Leader Shri K. Yerrannaidu and also from Shri R.L. Jalappa from the Opposition benches. Shri Jalappa was trying to counter each and every point raised by Shri K. Yerrannaidu. I should remind all my friends that river water is a national property, more so when it is an inter-State river.

Unfortunately in our country, the whole of the southern peninsula, including the States of Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Pondicherry, is starving for water on account of sustained draining of water into the Arabian sea on the one side and to the Bay of Bengal on the other. All of us together should wholeheartedly congratulate and express our sense of gratitude and thanks to the great visionary leader of India, the hon. Prime Minister Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee who has put forth the idea of linking of the Ganga and the Cauvery. All the northern rivers will be linked to the southern rivers and the excess water available in the rivers like the Ganga and the Brahmaputra will be taken into the southern peninsular States so that once and for all, all these problems will be solved.

I am surprised to see that this is the first time such an issue is being discussed under rule 193 in this House. I have never seen in my experience of fourteen years in this House that such an issue has been discussed under rule 193. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Sir, everybody is talking on this subject. This is not good.

SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI : I request that this debate may continue the whole of today and the debate on the Atrocities on Dalits, for which Shri Ram Vilas Paswan has given notice, can be taken up the day after tomorrow from 2 p.m. onwards so that they also get justice.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Okay. That is decided by the Speaker.

MR. CHAIRMAN : Okay. We will see at 4 o’clock.

SHRI RAM VILAS PASWAN : The Chairman is saying that he will decide at 4 o’clock. That means he will not announce it just now.

सभापति महोदय : आप सदन में उपस्थित रहिए।

SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI : If you see the desire of the House and make the announcement, he can take as much time as other speakers have taken.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Let him speak. Let him take his time.

SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI : I made this request because Shri Ram Vilas Paswan is saying that you will decide it at 4 o’clock. If it is announced now that the present debate will continue after 4 o’clock also, he can prepare for the day after tomorrow.

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : With due respect to the procedure followed in Parliament, I am not sure whether we will achieve anything by discussing this issue under rule 193. What we have heard from both the sides is the agony of the people in both the States which are fighting for getting more water. So, one can understand that there is shortage of water. If water was available in plenty I do not think anybody would have come before this House and shouted at each other at this raised voice. I am sorry, I am not attributing any motive to anybody. By doing so, I do not think the problem could be solved.

Sir, all of us are quite aware that in the case of such disputes, we have already set up a mechanism called the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act passed by the Parliament. There is also the Central Water Commission..… (Interruptions) Tribunals are constituted under the provision of Inter-State River Water Disputes Act. My good friend, Shri Yerrannaidu rightly referred to the award passed by the Bachawat Commission wherein the rightful share of all the riparian States, right from Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, has been decided. What is left is only sharing of excess water available in the Krishna River Basin.

Unfortunately, a lot of things were said about Karnataka. I am sorry that Karnataka is placed in between Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh. We are not the real upper riparian State. We are only the sub-upper riparian State. If water flows in abundance from Maharashtra, then, after fulfilling our requirements, we can provide you more than enough water so far as Krishna River is concerned.… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : What about Thungabadra River?… (Interruptions)

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : I agree with what you have said about Thungabadra. This is an unfortunate situation. When the Bachawat Commission has clearly demarcated your due share, I am sorry to say that Shri Yerrannaidu was trying to make out a case that the Bachawat Commission, while allocating the share of water from the Krishna River to these riparian States, has made project-wise allocation. I am sorry to say that no such allocation has been made. It is an en bloc allocation.… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU: Anyhow, Minister will clarify the position. Sir, how can we tolerate such blatant violations? This Award has been passed…… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Shri Yerrannaidu, do not be so intolerant. Please allow him to speak.

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : Shri Yerrannaidu, you yourself made a submission that it was an en bloc allocation. It is an en bloc allocation of 734 TMC of water. It is not project-wise allocation. It is an en bloc allocation. We are not questioning the right of Andhra Pradesh in utilising their share of 811 TMC of water. Have we raised any objections? Our objection, on the part of Karnataka, is, at the stage when you tried to acquire a permanent right in respect of the excess water which will have to be shared between the three riparian States.

In fact the Bachawat Award itself clearly states that the surplus water of 330 tmc, which is available over and above 2060 tmc which is already distributed among the riparian States of Karnataka, Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh, is to be allocated at the ratio of 25 per cent to the State of Maharashtra, 50 per cent to the State of Karnataka and 25 per cent to the State of Andhra Pradesh. This is also mentioned in the Bachawat Award. You please read that. The Award says that allocation of this available surplus water will have to be formally made into an Award by a Tribunal which will have to be constituted in a future date. The State of Karnataka has a rightful grouse against the Government of India for delaying the constitution of this Tribunal. Fortunately the hon. Minister made a statement in the other House in this regard and he had assured that within another fifteen days, the new Tribunal would be constituted. It will go into the issue of allocation of surplus waters available in the Krishna basin. Probably my friends from Telugu Desam Party being aware of this fact that a Tribunal is going to be constituted in another fifteen days, are in a hurry to come before this House to discuss this issue under Rule 193 and then start making all kinds of allegations against the State of Karnataka. I am sorry to say this. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Sir, my friend Shri Dhananjaya Kumar has taken my name.

MR. CHAIRMAN : He is not yielding.

… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shri Dhananjaya Kumar, are you yielding?

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : Yes.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Sir, all the three States -- Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Andhra Pradesh -- had requested the Government of India to constitute a Tribunal. The Tribunal will give the award or judgement after five or six years. Meanwhile, the present Award will continue to be valid. I am asking this now. The injustice meted out to my State should be rectified. The Tribunal will be constituted and it will take care of all other things. That is okay. I agree with Shri Dhananjaya Kumar on that. But there are violations in regard to RDS, Cauvery bunda, Thungabadra basin, Pennar basin, and Manjeera basin. You are not talking about that. I have given the figures. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Dr. Jagannath, please take your seat.

… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Nothing will go on record except Shri V. Dhananjaya Kumar’s speech.

… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Dr. Jagannath, please take your seat.

… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Dr. Jagannath, please take your seat.

… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shri Dhananjaya Kumar, please continue.

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : It is not my advice. I am nobody to advise the State of Andhra Pradesh. I would have appreciated the stand of Andhra Pradesh, had it quietly enjoyed the surplus water available, that is 330 tmc of water. Instead of enjoying that till the final Award is passed by the Tribunal which is going to be constituted in a future day, they have come up with the complaint before this august House, thereby making themselves naked. I am sorry to say this.… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : For 100 years, we will get water for 75 years. For every four years, we will not get water for one year. So, lower riparian States will be affected. That is why the Award has given full utilisation of surplus water to Andhra Pradesh.… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shri Yerrannaidu, you spoke for fifty minutes.

… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Dr. Jagannath, please take your seat.

… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shri Dhananjaya Kumar, please address the Chair.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : I am only addressing the Chair. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Please take your seat. Do not interrupt.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : Today on account of this opportunity being given to all of us, we are able to bring to the notice of the entire nation, the violations that are being committed by the State of Andhra Pradesh. … (Interruptions) Dr. Jagannath, I am with you. You know that. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Dr. Jagannath, you will also be speaking.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Sir, it is a simple thing. It is only a common sense. Andhra Pradesh is a lower riparian State. How can it commit violations? If Karnataka releases water, we will get. If we have surplus water, we will utilise it. If the State of Andhra Pradesh constructs small anicut or dam, what injustice is it committing to other States? I am asking this straight question. If Karnataka releases water, then only we will get it. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shri Yerrannaidu, you spoke for fifty minutes.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : How can we store more water? We do not have any provision to store more water than this.

As per the observations made by the Bachawat Commission, till the surplus water available in the Krishna basin is allocated among the riparian States, the lowest riparian State, that is Andhra Pradesh, has every opportunity to utilise 330 tmc of water.

I fully agree to that. But, at the same time, Shri Yerrannaidu, you have also submitted before this House that that shall not acquire you any permanent right.… (Interruptions) So, instead of quietly enjoying that, why have you come before this House today with this issue? That has given me an opportunity to show to this House how Andhra Pradesh is violating the norms in constructing the Telugu-Ganga Project, the Srisailam Left Bank Canal, the Srisailam Right Bank Canal, the Bhima Lift Irrigation Project, the Pulichintala Project, the drinking water supply to Hyderbad and Secunderabad cities from Srisailam Left Bank Canal Project; and drinking water supply to Tirupathi from the Telugu Ganga Project.… (Interruptions)

DR. S. VENUGOPAL: What about the Tungabadra basin?… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Shri Dhananjaya Kumar, what you are stating is correct. But what about the Tungabadra Basin? You are not talking about that.… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Shri Dhananjaya Kumar, you should address the Chair. Why are you putting questions to them?

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : I am only looking into this book. I am not looking at them.… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Nothing will go on record except Shri Dhnanjayakumar’s speech.

(Interruptions) … * * Not Recorded MR. CHAIRMAN: Please take your seat. You will get the chance to speak.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : I am not supporting anybody. I am supporting the cause of Karnataka. Shrimati Margaret Alva, you may fight among yourselves but I am fighting for the right of the people of Karnataka only. When it comes to the question of our true share of water, we are entitled to utilise it. The apprehension comes only when the State of Andra Pradesh has ventured to construct all these projects. … (Interruptions) They thereby want to perpetuate the right which they have got in utilising the surplus water available today. I am only cautioning them that within another 15 days, when the new Tribunal will be constituted, that will go into the sharing of the surplus water available and Andhra Pradesh will get its due share – 25 per cent surplus water. 50 per cent will be allocated to Karnataka. So, Shri Yerrannaidu, why do you indulge in going ahead with all these illegal projects?

We are now in a civilised society. We had passed the Inter-State River Waters Disputes Act and also we are having the facility of the Central Water Commission. Without getting the approval from the Central Water Commission, no State is supposed to venture into construction of any new projects … (Interruptions)

DR. MANDA JAGANNATH (NAGAR KURNOOL): What about Paragodu?

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : About that, we are getting the clearance from the Central Water Commission. A team was sent. … (Interruptions) For the construction of a dam or a reservoir, which will provide only water for drinking purposes, no clearance is required. It is only for an irrigation project that clearance is required.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : I have said that. That being so, why have you planned for irrigation purposes?… (Interruptions)

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : We have never planned like that. The Paragodu project is only for drinking water purpose.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : What about the old estimates? How can they be forgotten?

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : That is forgotten. Today, it is only used for drinking water purpose. … (Interruptions) I have forgotten about that.

Sir, in spite of these facts, Andra Pradesh has raised objections. The Water Resource Ministry sent a team of experts. They investigated the Paragodu Project. They made a report saying that it is only for drinking water supply to the district of Kolar, Gudibanda and Bagepalli taluks where no potable water is available under the ground. Thereafter, the Central Water Commission said: "You can go ahead with the construction of that." Why do we try to exaggerate things? I can understand the anxiety of my friend Shri Yerrannaidu in helping the people of Andhra Pradesh. They will have to take up the cause of Andhra Pradesh. I have no grudge against it. Shri Yerrannaidu, in your anxiety to help the people of your State, you should not make baseless allegations against Karnataka; you should not exaggerate things. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : It is a joke! SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : You should not present imaginary and motivated facts before this House. We are supposed to bring facts to the notice of the Chair and to the notice of the entire nation.

Sir, under these circumstances, I would only, if I am entitled, advice both the TDP as well as my friends from the Congress Party that unnecessarily they should not blame the Government of India. Even the Government of India cannot decide the purview of the inter-State River Waters Dispute Act. If, at all, the Government of India takes any decision which they are authorized to, they are challenging it in the court of law. Today, it has become a fashion to go to the Supreme Court for everything. We have already fought this case before the Supreme Court. The Supreme court has decided the dispute on the basis of merit and they have disallowed the plea of Andhra Pradesh.… (Interruptions) In the case of Almatti, the Supreme Court cleared the raising of the height of Almatti Dam. Now, in the case of Paragodu Dam, a team from the Central Water Commission came, they inspected it and they cleared the project and now the Government of India has already made an announcement that now the Tribunal is going to be constituted and once and for all this allocation of the surplus water available in the Krishna Basin is going to be decided.

Sir, I think the dispute can be resolved. As I said, in a civilised society, it is not fair for any one of us to fight like this for nothing. If plenty of water is available then probably it could be shared… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : You have enough water and you are happy. You come to Andhra Pradesh and see.

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : Sir, I should bring this fact to the notice of the House that Karnataka is facing the worst drought in the last 29 years. It is the worst kind of drought. Leave alone water for irrigation purposes, there is no water for drinking purposes. It is the worst kind of drought in the last 29 years. Please consider this. This is not a juncture when we should fight like this for nothing. If water is available, then it is fine, it could be utilised by both sides. When water is not available, what are we fighting for is only for the deficiency. Please consider this. I would only request that this is not the proper forum. Let us go before the CWC; let us go before the Tribunal. Under Rule 193, this issue cannot be resolved.

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Please conclude.

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : I am only trying to persuade my friend Shri Yerrannaidu that under Rule 193 this issue cannot be resolved. We will have to go before the CWC; we will have to go before the Tribunal and ultimately if we are not satisfied, then courts are there, they will decide it, but till then, as representatives of people, why can we not sit across the table? Under Rule 193, this dispute cannot be resolved here. Why can we not sit across the table? Why can we not discuss it and share the facts? As rightly requested by my friend, Shri Jalappa, let the Parliament constitute a Committee of the Members of Parliament. Let us go to both the States – Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka and let us see for ourselves as to who is right and who is wrong, how much water is available and how that could be shared and once for all, this dispute can be resolved. With these words, I am concluding. I have said all this because even in the matter of Cauvery, Karnataka is tried to be shown in bad light and Karnataka has become the whipping boy. On the one side Tamil Nadu raises objection. My friend, Shri Pannanimanickam is quietly enjoying it. Whenever we come to the Government of India, they say that you Karnataka people are always quarrelling with their neighbour. Karnataka is the most peaceful State in the entire country and I am proud of that.

We have never violated any provisions of law. … (Interruptions) I am not talking about the Chief Minister here. I am talking about the people of Karnataka. The people of Karnataka are peaceful and law-abiding. We have never violated any of the directions given either by the Court or by the Tribunal or by the Ministry. We have always been implementing whatever directions have been given by them. … (Interruptions)

Sir, finally I would only submit that this is not the proper forum and I would plead with them to sit across the table, discuss the matter and resolve this dispute once and for all.

   

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Mr. Chairman, Sir, as a respected parliamentarian, he is saying that this is not the proper forum to discuss this matter. So, he is degrading the Parliament.

MR. CHAIRMAN : This is his personal opinion. Please take your seat.

श्री राजेश रंजन उर्फ पप्पू यादव (पूर्णिया): सभापति जी, अभी माननीय सदस्य श्री वी.धनंजय कुमार कह रहे थे कि इस विषय पर बहस के लिए पार्लियामेंट प्रॉपर फोरम नहीं है। यदि ऐसा है, तो फिर इस विषय को सदन में लाने की इजाजत ही क्यों दी गई? …( व्यवधान)

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY (NARASARAOPET): Mr. Chairman, Sir, I stand here to support the cause of the people of Andhra Pradesh, but at the same time, I would like to bring to the notice of this august House certain drawbacks of the Central Government also.

Sir, as Shri Yerrainnaidu has mentioned, India is a Union of States with a written Constitution. Our founding fathers envisaged cooperation, mutual trust and peaceful co-existence between the States. Whenever States face any problems, there are various constitutional mechanisms that have been incorporated to solve those problems. The role of the Union Government is crucial in the present context. Their role is to advise, counsel, control and discipline the States in the interest of the nation.

Sir, India is a vast country, traversed by many rivers. These rivers cut across the States. There is absolute need for joint handling, understanding and cooperation amongst the States to ensure optimum utilisation of water.

Sir, water is a highly sensitive issue, more so, irrigation water. It is this irrigation water that makes one group of farmers to fight with another group of farmers and makes one set of villagers to fight with another set of villagers. There are fights among districts and now there are fights among States also. This is happening frequently due to the drought situation prevailing in various parts of the country.

Sir, utilisation of the scarce resource such as water has to be done judiciously. As Shri Yerrainnaidu was mentioning, article 262 of the Constitution provides for solution of inter-State river water disputes. Various constitutional provisions are prescribed for solving of such disputes. Tribunals, Courts, Regulatory Authorities, Controller Boards etc. are available for this purpose.

Sir, any problem of this nature used to be solved, so far, within these constitutional provisions. The Centre should play a role of an impartial, neutral umpire. In this case, the Centre has repeatedly abdicated this role. Time and again, the Central Government neglected this crucial problem. It is a vacillating Government. It is an ineffective Government that has created the present problem. The Centre has made half-hearted attempts in solving this problem. No information on river water data has been collected and no objective study was made. The team deputed by this Government had come to Hyderabad, met the Chief Minister, went to Bangalore and said that they were not given any representation from Andhra Pradesh. I do not know why Shri Yerrainnaidu has forgotten to mention this fact. So, an ineffective people went there, the team was not able to study the facts and that has created the problem.

As Shri Bangarappa was mentioning, our States – Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka – were friendly. In the year 1981, when Shri Gundu Rao was the Chief Minister and my district, Nellore, was losing crops, I had taken two TMC of water all the way from Karanataka, shared it and saved the crops. It is not a new thing. A ‘give-and-take’ situation was prevailing there.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : In both the States, the Congress Party was ruling.

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : It makes no difference, Shri Yerrannaidu. … (Interruptions)

I am telling a fact. … (Interruptions) I am not yielding.MR. CHAIRMAN : Shri Reddy, you please address the Chair.

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : Today, the Government of India should protect the interests of Andhra Pradesh. Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh are neighbouring States. I am telling about an incident that happened in the year 1988. Shri Rajiv Gandhi was the Prime Minister. Shri N.T. Rama Rao was the Chief Minister. Shri Rama Rao came and represented to Shri Rajiv Gandhi: "Almatti Dam in Karanataka is being constructed. Originally, it was planned for power generation. They are converting it. They are increasing its height." I was present. Shri Rajiv Gandhi immediately summoned the then Minister of Water Resources, Shri Shankaranand who was in Delhi and asked him to explain the position to Shri Rama Rao and satisfy him. Finally, we came to know that it was not Shri Shankaranand who gave the permission but Shri Hegde, the then Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission who did it. So, it is not a new thing that has happened. Then, the Central Government was effective. That is why they were able to solve the problem.

You have sent a team on a complaint of Shri Yerrannaidu or the Chief Minister. The team has no information that their State Government is objecting to it. They went to Bangalore and gave a statement that the Government of Andhra Pradesh has not given any objection, which is not correct. … (Interruptions)

My statement is correct but not what he has said. You are asking the Government to give reply. If you are able to give a command that way, Shri Yerrannaidu, the Government could have come to your rescue. You are not able to do it. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : It is the Congress Party. If they tell their colleagues to do justice, everything will be solved. But the Congress Party is playing a dual role. … (Interruptions) They have been ruling this country for 40 years. They have to do justice. … (Interruptions)

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : It is as if giving fodder to he-buffalo and requesting the cow to milk. You are giving full support of 29 MPs to this Government and you are asking us to solve the problem. If you have got the guts, I will resign and you also resign and get out. … (Interruptions)

SHRI BIKRAM KESHARI DEO (KALAHANDI): Sir, I have got a point of order. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : As a national party, they have to take the responsibility. … (Interruptions) If there is any violation, they have to order the Chief Minister and find out as to why he has violated it. That is the duty of the Congress Party. … (Interruptions) They have to play a role at the national level.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Dr. Manda Jagannath, please take your seat.

… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shri Bikram Keshari Deo, please take your seat.

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : I have not yielded.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Dr. Jagannath, he is not yielding. You please take your seat.

… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Nothing will go on record except the speech of Shri Janardhana Reddy.

(Interruptions) …* MR. CHAIRMAN : Shri Deo, he is not yielding. Dr. Jagannath, please take your seat.

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : When the key is in the hands of Shri Chandrababu Naidu and Members of TDP, why should they beg anybody?… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Please address the Chair. Do not ask any questions to them.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : What all the MPs from Andhra are doing?… (Interruptions)

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : The key is in their hands and they are not able to use it and besides that, they want to politicise it.

Sir, have you heard, after the Independence of this country, asking our party people to go against the project of other States? This is unfair. Why should we do that?

* Not Recorded Shri Krishna, CM of Karnataka and Shri Chandrababu Naidu, CM of Andhra Pradesh, met in Davos. They were there for two days discussing about Karnataka-Andhra problem. They could have continued their talk and solved this. Otherwise, if the Government of India is not able to do it, they could have pressurised them… (Interruptions)

DR. MANDA JAGANNATH : Sir, I would like to remind him… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: You need not remind him. Please take your seat.

… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: You are always interrupting. Please take your seat.

… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Nothing will go on record except Shri Janaradhana Reddy’s submission.

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : Sir, the hon. Member Shri Yerrannaidu has quoted Bachawat Award and given its details. I am not in Government, I do not have the details. But my party people have not gone as a war against the Karnataka Government. We went to every place and collected the information from the Government.

There are 19 projects that are going on in the State. Uppartunga Project, as he has already mentioned. Herrahally, Himangally for 250 lift irrigation projects. But they have increased it horse power. Around 35 lift irrigation projects have been permitted. Tungabhadra dam will not get water if these things are not going to be stopped. Then, Paragodu, as my friend has informed, over Chitravati; Nagalmanika over Pennar, Keitha project over Pennar… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : There are 11 projects in total, including Paragodu… (Interruptions)

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : Then, Pasuvellypenta, Gopalgunta, Madudodu, Vellahally, Nagarverry, Chavalgetty, Rangaraya projects; Chindiyanket; then, Gouribidnour tank capacity is being increased. These are all small projects. But it is a fact that some of them have been cleared by the Government of India and some of them have not been cleared by the Government of India.

MR. CHAIRMAN: There are ten speakers from the Congress Party to speak on this.

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : From the Congress Party, let me represent my State of Andhra Pradesh. I am not in any way criticising anybody.

As Shri Yerrannaidu himself has told that the Paragodu scheme, 260 crores worth of drinking water, given by Sri Sathya Sai Baba, is going to be completely get into problem soon. I do not know why has he not requested Sri Sathya Sai Baba to influence Shri Krishna, the CM of Karnataka, to do it.

Leaving the Government to tackle it. They are now trying to politicise it. Sir, they are telling that Shrimati Sonia Gandhi has not given time. It is the Chief Minister who came here on 21st of June – from 17th to 23rd Madam was not here. Then she has said ‘No’ to the team. She requested the team to meet Shri Manmohan Singh, Leader of Opposition, Rajya Sabha and explain to him. They have not done it. If it is really an issue to be represented to Shrimati Sonia Gandhi, or Congress Party, they would have met him. They have not done it.

SHRI K. YERRANNAID : Even recently also they have met.

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : They have not done it. Instead of that when Shri Krishna gave a representation to her, she has referred to with a good sense to AP to be answered so that he may take it up with Shri Krishna. Shri Krishna means Karnataka Chief Minister. So, when that is the situation, I feel sorry why they wanted to politicise it. Let us fight with this Government.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : We are fighting with the Government.

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : Shri Yerrannaidu, you are not fighting. If you 29 people are really fighting can Shri Vajpayee and Shri Advani refuse it?

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : That is not the solution. You know what type of fighting we are indulging in. We are asking the Government of India that if the facts are correct, let them cancel the CWC. Do fighting means real fighting or withdrawing support? What is the national Government doing?. What is this?

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA (SHIMOGA): You never said so in your speech. … (Interruptions)

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : They met Shri Arjun Sethi, the Minister and requested him to cancel the order for the Paragodu. I have seen it in the Press, the concerned Minister told… (Interruptions)

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : What have you been doing when you were ruling for the last forty years!… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Shri Dhananjaya Kumar.

… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: He is not yielding. Shri Dhananjaya Kumar, please take your seat.

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : You do not have to prove it in the House.… (Interruptions) We all know where you stand… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shri Dhananjay Kumar, why are you interrupting? You spoke for half an hour.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : I am only reminding him that they were ruling both at the Centre as well as in Andhra Pradesh. Why could they not resolve that dispute at that point of time? Why are they blaming the Central Government? He was the hon. Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh.… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shri V. Dhananjaya Kumar, please take your seat.

You address to the Chair. You wind up now.

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY :You spoke for 45 minutes. But now you are not allowing me to speak. Sir, my State Irrigation Minister Shri Srihari approached Shri Arjun Sethi. Arjun means Sabhya Sachi –using both the hands. But he is not using even one hand. He told, according to the Minister that they are going to stop the order for Paragodu but no order has gone from him because there were Karnataka people in the Government but 29 people without joining the Government are ruining the State. … (Interruptions)

DR. S. VENUGOPAL: That is not correct.

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : OK. Subject to correction.… (Interruptions)

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : The Minister was completely justified in refusing to stop it.… (Interruptions) This is not correct. They are blackmailing them. That is all.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Please conclude now, it is 4 o’clcok.

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : They are going against another State. They have arrested some people. My friends, some MPs, were also there. But one thing, even now, I appeal to the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh to sit down with Karnataka Chief Minister and solve the problem. Otherwise, as he rightly said, if you think that it is the right forum to fight. Answers would not come simply telling something here.

16.00 hrs. Shri K.Yerrannaidu, your leader has not permitted you to stage a walk-out from the House. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : That is not the solution. Sir, how can he direct? Is the walk-out a solution? … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Shri Janardhana Reddy, you please address the Chair. Please do not provoke him.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : That is not the method in the democracy. We want justice. We are also requesting the Congress Party. … (Interruptions) There is nothing wrong in it.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shri K. Yerrannaidu, you please take your seat.

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : If you are requesting the Congress Party, then let us fight in a manner where the konda meeti kothi, (monkey on the hill top) even the mighty will get down. Otherwise, what is the point in talking politics here, politicising the issue and making Andhra people fools? If it is really a fact, then we are made to suffer. My district is going to suffer because of paragodu where Pennar river is there. Shri Dhananjaya Kumar is telling that they are also the lower riparian State. It is not for Pennar. Pennar starts there.

Sir, they are mentioning about Telugu-Ganga project. It is Telugu-Ganga. It is not Smt. Indira Gandhi who laid the foundation … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Now, it is four o’ clock. There is another discussion under rule 193. Please take your seat.

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : Sir, within a few minutes, I will conclude.

MR. CHAIRMAN: You finish your speech within two minutes.

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : Sir, my friends are telling about Telugu-Ganga … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Please take your seat. We have to take the sense of the House about the next item in the agenda of the House. Now, it is four o’ clock. There are a large number of Members to participate in this debate. But there is another important discussion under Rule 193 regarding atrocities on Dalits. So, I want to take the sense of the House whether to continue with this debate and take up the discussion under Rule 193 regarding atrocities on Dalits later.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Sir, it is an important discussion. We can continue with this discussion. … (Interruptions)

श्री अशोक कुमार सिंह चन्देल : सभापति महोदय, दलित वाले मामले को किसी अन्य तथि में स्थानान्तरित कर दिया जाए।

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : Mr. Chairman, one speaker was given 50 minutes. We have not got a chance to speak. We do want to speak on this subject. We must be given more time. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay.

स्वास्थ्य और परिवार कल्याण मंत्री तथा संसदीय कार्य मंत्री (श्रीमती सुषमा स्वराज) : ये दोनों ही विषय बहुत महत्वपूर्ण हैं - पानी वाला मसला, जो इस समय चल रहा है और दलितों पर होने वाले अत्याचार का मसला भी बहुत गंभीर है। वह बहस भी दो घंटे में समाप्त नहीं हो सकेगी। इसलिए मेरा सदन के सामने सुझाव रहेगा कि आज हम इसे पूरा कर लें। जो वक्ता इस विषय पर बोलना चाहते हैं, वे बोल लें और जवाब हो जाए। जिस दिन हम दलितों पर अत्याचार वाला मामला लें, वह भी दो बजे से शुरू करें जो साढ़े छ:, सात बजे तक जा सके, उसके साथ भी न्याय हो सके और इस चर्चा के साथ भी न्याय हो सके। बेहतर यह होगा कि हम आज इसे समाप्त कर लें तथा किसी और दिन उस चर्चा को लें।

श्री अशोक कुमार सिंह चन्देल : सभापति महोदय, बुधवार को हमारी पार्टी के सब सांसदों की लखनऊ में बैठक हो रही है। इसलिए बुधवार के अलावा कोई अन्य दिन तय कर लें।

सभापति महोदय : ठीक है, आप बैठिए।

श्री राम विलास पासवान: पार्लियामैंट्री अफेयर्स मनिस्टर ने जो कहा है, हमें उसमें कोई आपत्ति नहीं है। मैं आपसे इतना ही आग्रह करना चाहता हूं कि कल हो या परसों हो, शुक्रवार को ठीक नहीं रहेगा, डेट अभी तय कर दें, तो ठीक रहेगा। कल के लिए बिजनस पहले से ही लगा हुआ है। परसों या उसके अगले दिन, जिस दिन सदन की राय हो, हमें कोई आपत्ति नहीं है। उन्होंने ठीक ही कहा है कि डिस्कशन दो बजे से शुरू हो। आप डेट की घोषणा अभी कर दें जिससे कोई कन्फ्यूज़न न हो।

श्री शिवराज वि.पाटील: श्रीमन्, हमारी पार्टी की तरफ से यही बताया गया था और पासवान जी भी यही कह रहे हैं तो हमें कोई आपत्ति नहीं है।

सभापति महोदय : अभी कुछ नहीं कहा जा सकता। बिजनैस क्या है, वह देख कर ही बताया जाएगा।

श्री राम विलास पासवान: पार्लियामैंट्री अफेयर्स मनिस्टर को मालूम है कि क्या बिजनैस होने वाला है। मैं समझता हूं कि ६ या ७ अगस्त, जिस दिन गृह मंत्री जी को सुविधा हो और सरकार की मंशा हो, इसे रख दें।

श्रीमती सुषमा स्वराज : ७ अगस्त को दो संविधान संशोधन विधेयक लगे हुए हैं। इसलिए ७ अगस्त को कुछ नहीं हो सकता लेकिन संविधान संशोधन के पहले सिक्स्थ शैडयूल पास होना जरूरी है। इसलिए अगर हम ६ तारीख को बारह से एक बजे के बीच में सिक्स्थ शैडयूल पास कर दें तो ६ तारीख की दोपहर दो बजे यह विषय लिया जा सकता है।

श्री अशोक कुमार सिंह चन्देल : ६ अगस्त को हमारी बैठक है।

श्रीमती सुषमा स्वराज : अगर इनकी यह दिक्कत है तब यह विषय सोमवार को जाएगा क्योंकि शुक्रवार को इस चर्चा के कोई मायने नहीं हैं। ७ तारीख को हमने दो संविधान संशोधन रखे हैं, सब पार्टियों को व्हिप जारी किया गया है। ६ अगस्त को6th शैडयूल पारित होना बेहद जरूरी है तभी संविधान संशोधन पारित होगा। कल ५ तारीख को एक और नियम के अधीन का डिसकशन लगा है।…( व्यवधान)या फिर कल होने वाले डिसकशन को सोमवार को ले जाएं और इसे कल ले लें, ऐसा भी कर सकते हैं। यह आगे बढ़ रहा है। कल दलितों वाला विषय ले लें और कल वाले विषय को सोमवार को ले लें। वह विपक्ष के नेता बता सकते हैं। इसे आप तय कर लें।…( व्यवधान)कल होने वाली नियम १९३ के अधीन चर्चा को सोमवार को ले जाना है तो कल यह हो सकता है और यदि कल वाला वहीं रखना है तो यह सोमवार को हो सकता है।…( व्यवधान)

   

SHRI RUPCHAND PAL (HOOGLY): Tomorrow, we have to take up the discussion on CBI.

श्री राम विलास पासवान: हमारा कहना इतना ही है कि ९ तारीख को मैम्बर ऑफ पार्लियामेंट जिसमें जर्नेलिस्ट्स भी हैं, उनका डेलीगेशन पाकिस्तान जा रहा है। उसमें हम लोग भी हैं। ९ अगस्त से १३ अगस्त तक कार्यक्रम है।

श्रीमती सुषमा स्वराज : फिर राम विलास पासवान जी, बैटर होगा कि कल इसे ले लें और कल वाली नियम १९३ के अधीन चर्चा सोमवार को ले लें।…( व्यवधान)

श्री राम विलास पासवान: ८ अगस्त को प्राइवेट मैम्बर्स बिल है। …( व्यवधान)फिर ८ तारीख से पहले ही संभव है।…( व्यवधान)

डॉ. सुशील कुमार इन्दौरा (सिरसा) :सभापति जी, मेरी कांस्टीटयूएंसी बिल्कुल पाकिस्तान से लगती है। हमें भी उस डेलीगेशन में भेजा जाए। सर, हमें आपका संरक्षण चाहिए।…( व्यवधान)मैं अपनी पार्टी का नेता हूं, पाकिस्तान में डेलीगेशन जा रहा है और हमारी पार्टी की तरफ से कोई नहीं भेजा जा रहा है। हमारी कांस्टीटयूएंसी पाकिस्तान से लगती है। सौ समस्याएं हम जानते हैं।…( व्यवधान)

सभापति महोदय : वह अलग इश्यू है। आप बैठिए। बाद में आप बात कर लीजिएगा।

…( व्यवधान)

डॉ. सुशील कुमार इन्दौरा: सर, हमें आपका संरक्षण चाहिए। हमें वहां भिजवाइए।

सभापति महोदय : ठीक है। आपको भेजा जाएगा।

SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI : Mr. Chairman, Sir, we have all agreed that on the particular date of 7th August, we shall not take up any issue from our side except the Constitution Amendment Bills. We further agreed to accommodate some Government business of a few more legislation. We shall also give time to the Government on the 6th August but the question is that two debates were fixed for today by the BAC and it appears that on this particular debate several hon. Members want to put forward their viewpoints.

My distinguished colleague Shri Ram Vilas Paswan is very right that at the fag end of the day, if we take two hours for discussing atrocities on Scheduled Castes, we would not be able to do justice to the debate. Therefore, my personal submission and my submission on behalf of my party is that we shall not distribute the business today so far as this debate is concerned but let us shift the debate on atrocities of Scheduled Castes for day after tomorrow without disturbing tomorrow’s fixed business, as it is. We can accommodate other legislative business of the Government if possible on the 6th, but on the 7th we would not bring up any issue other the Constitution Amendment Bills. That is my submission.

SHRI AJOY CHAKRABORTY (BASIRHAT): Sir, tomorrow, we have to take up the discussion on the CBI.

MR. CHAIRMAN: If the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution (Amendment) Bill is passed by one o’clock, we can take up the debate at two o’clock.

SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI : From our side, we will co-operate.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shri Ram Vilas Paswan and others will leave for Pakistan the next day. It is not possible to accommodate this debate on the 7th. The 8th is a Friday and it is not possible to have the discussion on a Friday. So, we are left with only the 6th.

श्री अशोक कुमार सिंह चन्देल : सभापति जी, बुधवार को हमारी पार्टी की बैठक है। इसे बुधवार को नहीं लिया जा सकता।…( व्यवधान)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Please take your seat.

श्री अशोक कुमार सिंह चन्देल : सर, ६ अगस्त को कैसे हो जाएगा ? ६ तारीख को लखनऊ में हमारी पार्टी की बैठक है। ६ अगस्त को हमारा कोई भी सांसद यहां नहीं रहेगा। यह दलितों की पार्टी है और दलितों के मामले पर क्या हम लोग ही नहीं बोलेंगे?…( व्यवधान)

डॉ. सुशील कुमार इन्दौरा: सर, यह दलितों का नाम लेने वाली पार्टी है।…( व्यवधान)

श्री अशोक कुमार सिंह चन्देल : ६ अगस्त को छोड़कर और कोई भी तथि निर्धारित कर दें, हम सहमत हैं लेकिन हम ६ अगस्त के लिए सहमत नहीं हैं। यह गलत हो रहा है। इस तरीके से नहीं चलेगा।…( व्यवधान)

श्रीमती सुषमा स्वराज :फिर दूसरा सुझाव यह हो सकता है कि ८ तारीख को प्राइवेट मैम्बर्स डे को किसी अगली बार लिया जाए और ८ तारीख को इसे कर लें ताकि राम विलास पासवान जी भी ९ तारीख को जा सकें और इनकी भी ६ तारीख एडजस्ट हो जाए।

SHRI RAM VILAS PASWAN : We do not want it on the last day of the week. कोई आदमी लास्ट डे, शुक्रवार को नहीं रहता है। सब लोग अपने घर चले जाते हैं।…( व्यवधान)

श्री अशोक कुमार सिंह चन्देल : ऐसा नहीं हो सकता तो हम भी इस चीज से सहमत नहीं हैं।…( व्यवधान)

सभापति महोदय : शुक्रवार को तो हो सकता है।

श्रीमती सुषमा स्वराज: जो कल बिजनैस है, उसको सोमवार को ले जाएं। इसे कल कर लीजिए। कोई तो एडजस्ट करिए।…( व्यवधान)

श्री राम विलास पासवान: सर,आपका भी नाम मेरे साथ है।

सभापति महोदय : हम भी बोलेंगे। आप भी बोलना।

श्री अशोक कुमार सिंह चन्देल : आप इस विषय को शुक्रवार को ले लें।

श्री राम विलास पासवान: सभापति महोदय, फ्राइडे को सब लोग चले जाते हैं, क्योंकि उनके आगे प्रोग्राम होते हैं। इसलिए अगर आपको शुक्रवार को ही इस विषय को लेना है तो प्रश्न काल के तुरंत बाद १२ बजे इसे शुरू करवा दें।

श्रीमती सुषमा स्वराज: ठीक है। हम भी इसके लिए तैयार हैं। शुक्रवार को ठीक १२ बजे इस विषय पर चर्चा शुरू हो जाएगी। हमें इसमें कोई आपत्ति नहीं है।

MR. CHAIRMAN : There will be no lunch break. It will continue up to 6 o’ clock.

… (Interruptions)MR. CHAIRMAN: Is it the pleasure of the House that the next discussion under rule 193 be taken up on Friday just after the Question Hour? Private Members’ Business will be postponed to some other day.

… (Interruptions)

श्रीमती सुषमा स्वराज: ठीक है।

श्री अशोक कुमार सिंह चन्देल : सभापति महोदय, इन्दौरा साहब को पाकिस्तान तो भिजवा दें।

सभापति महोदय : वे भी जाएंगे।

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shri N. Janardhana Reddy, please conclude your speech now.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : Sir, even now, I appeal, through you, to my Andhra colleagues – whatever maybe the Party— to put the cause of Andhra Pradesh effectively and bring the result. Unfortunately, my friends are neither on that side nor on this side. They are in Trishanku Swarga. That is why, they are not able to get the proper result.

The hon. Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh is the king-maker. He has made Governors. He has got everything from the Centre like the high quantity of rice etc. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : You have to appreciate it. … (Interruptions)

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : I am appreciating it, but you are not able to solve the main problem of water. … (Interruptions)

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : Now, he is deprecating you. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Unfortunately, there is a Congress Government. That is why, we are not able to do anything. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shri N. Janardhana Reddy, please conclude now.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : Whenever anybody brings the river problem here, the hon. Minister of Water Resources, Shri Arjun Charan Sethi, tells that let the Ganga-Cauvery link come, then all the problems will be solved. Are we to wait up to Ganga-Cauvery link? In the meantime, the people of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh would get killed in a war. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shri N. Janardhana Reddy, you have already spoken for more than half an hour. Please conclude.

… (Interruptions)

   

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : My colleagues, Shri R.L. Jalappa and other friends, have rightly said that we have constructed Telugu Ganga. But the Bachawat Award clearly says that it is not going to give a claim by constructing it. We are not claiming it. As a matter of fact, Rayalaseema has got three lakh acres of land to be irrigated under Telugu Ganga and from Somashila 2.5 lakh acres in Nellore District, but not even a cent of land is being cultivated so far. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : So far! … (Interruptions)

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : Yes. That is why, this Government has been sleeping for so many years without appointing the Second Krishna Tribunal. If they had appointed it then the problem could have been solved. … (Interruptions)

THE MINISTER OF WATER RESOURCES (SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI): You have mentioned that one-year time is available at the disposal of the Central Government. So, within one-year we have to constitute the Tribunal and one year has not yet passed. You should remember it. … (Interruptions)

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : Sir, I agree with the hon. Minister that one year time is there. Let him take full one year. Meanwhile, let the Karnataka Government stop all the constructions. But they are not able to do it. … (Interruptions)

Yes, I do agree. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Shri Janardhana Reddy, please take your seat. I have called hon. Member Shri S.S. Palanimanickam to speak.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : The Government of Andhra Pradesh has not done anything. … (Interruptions) I request the Central Government also. … (Interruptions)

SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI: It can be done provided the yardstick should be applicable to each and every State. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Shri Janardhana Reddy, please take your seat. I have already called Shri Palanimanickam to speak.

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : Sir, please allow me for a minute. I want to make two submissions. Firstly, I want to appeal to the Government of India to expedite the appointment of the second Krishna Tribunal and take up the floodwater issue also. In the meanwhile they should stop construction on both the sides if there is anything. … (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : Yes, it should be on both sides. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Thank you. Shri Palanimanickam to speak now.

SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM (THANJAVUR): Thank you Mr. Chairman for the opportunity given. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Shri Janardhana Reddy, he has already started speaking.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : Sir, just a minute. If that is not going to be done, then let our Telugu Desam friends and I join together to quit the Parliament so that the Government may come down. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Thank you very much.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI : Sir, I hope he will agree because the people of Andhra Pradesh want more water from Karnataka. That is a solution. … (Interruptions)

SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM : Sir, there is no Kannada or Telugu here. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Sir, hon. Member Shri Priya Ranjan Dasmunsi is the Chief Whip of the Party. He has to advise Karnataka. They are the habitual offenders since 30 years. … (Interruptions) What is this? … (Interruptions)

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : Sir, I do not agree here. It is from Karnataka that we have taken water so many times. … (Interruptions)

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : Yes, that is the point. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Sir, I will agree with the statement by Shri Janardhana Reddy. Our hon. Chief Minister has requested for 30 TMC ft. of drinking water and in turn we are ready to give power. They did not listen. … (Interruptions) Now you are saying we are neighbouring States. … (Interruptions) They have enough water in Almatti dam and in Narainpur dam. We have requested for water. The people of Andhra Pradesh did not get the water. … (Interruptions) What are you talking about neighbouring States? … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Shri Yerrannaidu, you have referred to all these things. You have spoken for 50 minutes.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : Sir, if they want water, they had plenty of water in Jurala and also in Nagarjunasagar of more than 158 TMC ft. of water. In Jurala they have about 8 TMC ft. of water. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Shri Jalappa, I will take you to that place. You come with me and I will show you our reservoirs. … (Interruptions)

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : It is already three months now. You have utilised it. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Mr. Chairman, Sir, I am giving an assurance on the floor of the House. I will take hon. Member Shri Jalappa and show him our reservoirs and he can take me to show their reservoirs. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Nothing will go on record except the speech of Shri S.S. Palanimanickam.

(Interruptions) …* SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : You see how the people and the farmers are suffering. … (Interruptions)

* Not Recorded     MR. CHAIRMAN ; Shri Jalappa, please take your seat. Shri Janardhana Reddy, please take your seat. There are large number of speakers. Please take your seats.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : Sir, one last sentence. I appeal to the Chief Minister of Karnataka to release water to Krishna Basin so that the irrigation may start and the ill-feelings may go.

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : Yes, they will go. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Shrimati Margaret Alva, you influence your Chief Minister. … (Interruptions)

                   

SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM (THANJAVUR): Sir, without Tamil, there is no Kannada and there is no Telugu when water is an issue. They are only young ‘daughters’ whereas we are a little ‘old mothers’. They are fighting with each other. I want to use this opportunity to place my case also in this august House. … (Interruptions) All the hon. Members from Congress, TDP and BJP are very much insisting that we can settle these matters through dialogue. In democracy it is a right solution to solve all problems through dialogue. My friend, hon. Member Shri Dhananjay Kumar said that the Karnataka people are very law-abiding citizens. … (Interruptions) Yes, I agree with the portion of ‘citizens’. But I do not agree with the portion of ‘Government’. The Government must go by the rule of law. … (Interruptions) Regarding the Cauvery issue, after nearly 25 years with 28 sittings of the Chief Ministers of both the States, having no solution found, after the efforts taking by the former Chief Minister, Dr. Kalaingar, on 2.6.1990, the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal was formed under the direction of the Supreme Court.

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : Sir, it is a different issue altogether. No other issue can be taken up here. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K.H. MUNIYAPPA (KOLAR): Sir, this discussion is confined to Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka only. … (Interruptions)

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : Sir, both Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka are fighting with each other. … (Interruptions)

SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM : But still you are not able to solve the problem. … (Interruptions)

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA: In their case, their Chief Minister is very adamant. She does not want to hear the hon. Prime Minister and the Chief Minister of Karnataka. … (Interruptions) We will not allow them to raise this subject here. … (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : Sir, I object to this. This is not the subject of the discussion. It is totally different. … (Interruptions)

SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM : Sir, under the direction of the Supreme Court, on 2.6.1990, the Tribunal was constituted.… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Shri Palanimanickam, please confine yourself to the subject.

SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM : I am very much confining myself to the subject. I am also one of the senior Members of the House. … (Interruptions) After the Tribunal awarded the Interim Order on 26.6.1991, for 205 tmc ft. of water, the Government of Karnataka issued an Ordinance against the Interim Order… (Interruptions) Then, the Tamil Nadu Government went to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court constituted Constitution Bench which gave the judgement that the Interim Award was valid.

SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI : Mr. Chairman, Sir, kindly give a ruling that the Members should not make aspersions either on the State Government or on the Chief Minister. Let the debate be held in a healthy atmosphere and let the hon. Members confine themselves to the subject that was moved by Shri K. Yerrannaidu. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Shri Palanimanickam, the subject of the discussion under Rule 193 is regarding ‘sharing of inter-state river water between the States of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka’. Therefore, you will have to confine yourself to this subject.

SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM : I have the agenda paper before me. I have started my speech by referring to Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka and I will end my speech by referring to Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka and, in between… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: You will have to begin and end by referring to Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, and you should not refer to other issues.

SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM : When all the other Members do not follow this, why should I restrict myself to that?

MR. CHAIRMAN: You should not refer to other issues and you should confine yourself to the subject.

SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM : Sir, I will follow your ruling. I will not go against your ruling. I know the rules.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Do not enlarge the scope of the debate.

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : Sir, the CWC is meeting day after tomorrow.… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: The subject is about sharing of inter-state river water between the States of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka and not between the States of Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh. If you want to discuss the issue of sharing of inter-state water between the States of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka, then you should bring another motion.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : Sir, it should not go on record. … (Interruptions)

SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM : Sir, whenever one hon. Member belonging to the CPI (M) Party starts a debate, he always ends it up by referring to West Bengal. … (Interruptions)

We went to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court constituted a Constitutional Bench, which gave the judgment that the Interim Award given by the Tribunal was valid. The G.O., was issued and published on 10.12.1991. … (Interruptions) But so far they have not implemented the Interim Award. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Nothing will go on record, except the speech of Shri Palanimanickam.

(Interruptions) …* MR. CHAIRMAN: Dr. Saroja, please take your seat. Shri Malaisamy, please resume your seat.

… (Interruptions)

* Not Recorded SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM : So far, they have not implemented the Interim Award fully. The Cauvery River Authority was constituted in August, 1998. Then, the hon. Prime Minister constituted a Monitoring Committee under the Chairmanship of the then Secretary (Water Resources). In 2002-03, though our share was 205 TMC of water, we received only 95 TMC of water.(Interruptions) Last year, to save the crops, the Supreme Court passed an order, but they have not honoured it. If they had released 10 TMC of water… (Interruptions) Even after the order of the Supreme Court, the Karnataka Government had not honoured to release the water.

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : Sir, I raised a point of order, and I want your ruling on it. The subject is totally different.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I have already told him that the subject is regarding sharing of inter-state river water between the States of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM : If they had released 10 TMC of water, the Cauvery Delta farmers would have saved their crops. Now they are discussing about the distress formula. Already the Central Water Commission placed the distress formula. The Karnataka Government are not ready to follow the formula At present, in Karnataka dams 53 tmc ft. of water is there. They have released the water for irrigation in Kabini and Krishnarajasagar. But they do not have the courtesy to release water on the basis of interim award. Every time they set our dams empty .… (Interruptions) If they are doing like this, then I also would not allow them, even if they are talking on the subject. This is not the way to deal with the Members. Are they confining themselves to the subject? … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Dr. Saroja, the subject is regarding sharing of inter-state river water between the States of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka. Members should confine themselves to this subject.

   

DR. V. SAROJA : Sir, let him make his mention; let him complete his speech. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: It is not about sharing of water between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. Please do not dilute the issue, Shri Palanimanickam.

SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM : Our share in June was 10 TMC of water and, in July, our share was 42 TMC of water. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: This is not fair.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI T.M. SELVAGANPATHI (SALEM): Sir, are we not supposed to refer to the illegalities committed by the Karnataka Government? … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : You cannot refer to the other issues.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI T.M. SELVAGANPATHI : Is he not supposed to even refer to Karnataka?

SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM : Sir, the Government of Karnataka is not implementing the orders of the Tribunal. The Government of Karnataka has never accepted the Supreme Court order and the Tribunal order.

For the last 15 years, the Karnataka farmers have started summer crops. They utilise 50 tmc ft. of water during summer for their cultivation. This is the reason why their dams are empty. The Government of Karnataka never followed any rules. I demand that the Central Government should intervene on this issue and ask the Karnataka Government to release at least 10 tmc of water to the Cauvery Delta farmers to start agricultural operations. I, therefore, urge upon the Central Government to prevail on the Government of Karnataka and do justice to the lower riparian States of Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Sir, I am the mover of the motion and I have got only one Member to speak from my party.

MR. CHAIRMAN: After Shri Bangarappa, the next speaker will be from your party.

DR. V. SAROJA : Sir, I have given my name.

MR. CHAIRMAN: You will be given chance.

डॉ. रघुवंश प्रसाद सिंह :सभापति महोदय, मैं भी इस विषय पर बोलना चाहता हूं।

सभापति महोदय : यह बिहार का इशू नहीं है।

SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI : He will be the arbitrator of the entire debate.

डॉ. रघुवंश प्रसाद सिंह :मैं इसमें न्याय करूंगा।…( व्यवधान)

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA (SHIMOGA): Mr. Chairman, Sir, with all humility at my command and due respect to our friend leader Shri Yerrannaidu and other hon. Members of not only his party but also others sitting around here, I would say that this discussion is no doubt of great importance.

Many details are there to discuss upon. However, I do not think that under Rule 193 we can go into all the details of the subject. After all, the Government has all the power - as the hon. Minister knows it, and we also know - to take up this subject keeping in view the interest of not only the States concerned but also of the entire nation.

What we should keep in our mind is the national interest because all these rivers – whether Krishna basin rivers or the rivers that are there as tributaries to Cauvery, or Sutlej river relating to Haryana or Punjab – are national assets. Wherever such rivers are flowing in our country, they belong to the entire country. All rivers are national assets. If you construct a dam across a river in a given State of our Indian Union, we offer that as a great asset to the entire country, whether that Government is headed by BJP or Congress or any other political party.

In our federal structure, a certain political party sometimes gets majority in the election and comes to power for the given term under the Constitution. Sometimes two political parties also come together, as required under the Constitution, to form Government and a coalition rules the country. But, we have not forgotten our basic commitment, the basic principle that all these rivers are national assets. Likewise, our power projects, or some other projects, account for the unity of the country in general and the national economic growth in particular.

This fact will have to be kept in mind. There is no doubt that Andhra Pradesh has contributed much to the nation-building likewise, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Pondicherry, Kerala, Maharashtra, and other States in the Northern belt, and the States from East and West have done. So, we are proud to say that we are all part and parcel of the whole Indian union, which has got a great federal structure. We are committed to the basic structure of the federalism as envisaged in our Constitution.

I do agree with Shri K. Yerrannaidu. In fact, he has not sacrificed all these basic principles. I was observing his speech. I do appreciate his approach. What he said at the fag end of his speech was that ‘we all appeal to the Government of India and the hon. Minister incharge of Irrigation to come forward and settle this matter.’ While making such a point, sometimes he said that we have gone a little astray from the subject. But whether he speaks or I speak or some other hon. Member speaks, we tend to give that feeling sometimes. But I do not think that it is the basic approach of the hon. Member of this House, and more so of the leader of a political party like Telugu Desam.

Sir, I have got highest respect for Shri Chandrababu Naiduji. He is a great friend of mine. I also know that he has got a lot of respect for our hon. Chief Minister, Shri S.M. Krishna. They had met each other while going abroad. They had met each other on another occasion also, and they had discussed this matter also. What I learnt is that our hon. Chief Minister had told him about this matter.

Though we are debating this matter, but we cannot decide anything here on the floor of this House. That is the point. While doing so, we have to keep in mind that this river is not the only river in our country. Like this, there are hundreds of thousands of rivers in the entire globe at the world level also. What happened in America? Take the case of a river related to Arcane and Arizona. They also fought with each other in America. Their matter went up to their Supreme Court, the Federal Court of America. The Federal Court refused to intervene saying that ‘it is a matter between the two States; let the Federal Government of America preside over this subject and decide the matter.’ In fact, all the concerned States agreed.

Likewise, the other day, I was going through one newsitem on TV which said that there is one river which takes birth in Lebanon and flows down to Israel. Israel uses it for drinking water purpose. But Lebanon said, ‘we are not going to allow the drinking water to Israel because we ourselves do not have much water.’ Then, Israel said, ‘No; if you do not allow the drinking water to Israel, then we are going to blow up the dam you have constructed.’ I have forgotten the name of the river. But what I mean to say is that this is how things are happening.

You take the example of Europe. Same thing is happening there. So, let us draw the lines and take lessons from all these matters. Even in Europe, it happened. Smaller States like Holland, Poland, Denmark, etc., are facing the similar problems relating to the sharing of water of the river taking its birth in one State flowing down and passing through many States.

Take the case of Denu river. It is flowing through seven to eight countries.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Nile river is also there.

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : Yes.

In fact, in Europe, the matter went up to the International Court of Justice where they said, ‘We do not want to intervene.’ They refused to intervene. So, to be frank with you, the matter was again referred to and settled among the affected States only. This is what I learnt, subject to correction. So, this is how we must also look at the things.

Now, I am coming back to the subject in hand. The matter is relating to Krishna basin water. There is a dispute. It is a problem for all of us. Though many people call it a dispute, I call it a big problem. It is a huge problem faced by all the concerned States. Who are the member-States having the dispute? I think, there are three main States. One is Maharashtra where Krishna takes it birth at the place called Mahabaleshwar.

There is a place called in Mahabaleshwar which is in the Western Ghat. I have seen that place. Down the river in the middle, we, Karnataka, come, and than what we call the lower riparian region Andhra Pradesh comes. It is also a huge State. They are receiving more water than others. They are receiving more water than they were allocated by the Bachawat Tribunal in its report. We do agree with it. We know the first award, the second award, and so on. I do not want to take you into all these things because a lot of figures are there. Sir, 500 TMC was awarded in the first award by Bachawat to Maharashtra; 700 TMC to us; and 800 TMC to Andhra Pradesh. In the second award we have gone up to 811 or something like that. We have gone up to 734 TMC.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : With the regeneration.

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : Yes, with the regeneration. They have said something like that Maharashtra have also gone up under the second award. We do agree with all those things. Nobody is disputing that.

There is another State, a State which is somewhat a party to the dispute, that is Tamil Nadu as far as element of drinking water problem to Madras city is concerned. In fact, we have agreed before Bachawat that Maharashtra should give 5 TMC, Karnataka 5 TMC, and Andhra Pradesh 5 TMC to Tamil Nadu. We, three States, are friends. We can join together to help our friendly State Tamil Nadu to give drinking water to Madras city. That is why, we are altogether one, as far as helping other States is concerned.

The hon. Minister must be delighted to see this matter. Actually this is how we must look at the things. Therefore, I feel, Sir, that though it looks very, very huge, it looks huge in America, in Europe, and elsewhere also; but this is not a huge problem. I think it has happened in many countries. I do not want to quote here but I have a huge list here. But one thing is definite that if we will just sit across the table and start sorting out the matters under the leadership of the Central Government, I think we can, settle all these problems. That is how I look at the things.

Now, what I feel is that this process of confidence-building is required. For this, I appeal, through you, Sir, to the Government of India, to the hon. Prime Minister, to the Deputy Prime Minister and to the hon. Minister in charge of Irrigation to please take up this issue of confidence-building measure. We, all the concerned States, are thankful to you. Only course open to all of us is to settle the disputes under the Inter-State Water Disputes Act 1955. How are you going to take that tribunal? These are all the statutory provisions under which you can think of resolving these issues. What I feel is that you must rise to the occasion. You bring all details of the project from your side; We will bring from our side, and Maharashtra will bring from their side also. All the details should be brought before a relevant forum, a legal forum. For that we are going to create a Tribunal. We will do all those things, including Paragodu, and drinking water problems You made a reference, and Shri Jalappa also made a reference to many of problems, namely, fluoride and so on. It is horrible in our Kolar district, even in our Ananthpur district also. It is horrible in the entire belt also. All the youngsters – both boys and girls – and elderly people have lost their lives after drinking the underground water taken from thousands of feet. Waterfall and rainfall are very, very less there. You know the water table has come down. It is coming down year by year. It is a matter of great concern. As far as Paragodu is concerned, we have said this matter earlier also. We do agree that it was there. As Shri Jalappa has said, the Karnataka Government has, now given that portion. We have confined ourselves only to drinking water. You are the hon. Minister in charge of this matter. As far as drinking water is concerned, we have to give first priority to it. The problem of drinking water may be on your side or the other side or anywhere else. The same thing may be there in the Northern belt. If such problems arise in respect of other areas, either in the upper riparian region or lower riparian region, what will happen?

What I would appeal to the Chief Ministers of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka is that they may please sit across the table under the leadership of the Central Government and discuss the drinking water problem because there is acute shortage of drinking water in Andhra Pradesh, in Karnataka and even in Maharashtra. To my knowledge, that is the problem; the same problem is there in Cauvery basin also. But since the matter is not on hand, I am not touching the Cauvery basin problem now.

After all, the farmers living in Cauvery basin are also our brothers and sisters. The farmers living in Karnataka, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, etc. are all our brothers and sisters. They are contributing towards food production. They contribute to the total food production. We are great contributors that way – from your side, from our side and whichever project you take.

Whenever there is acute shortage of water, there is distress sharing. In Cauvery basin also, there is distress sharing.

16.41 hrs. (Shrimati Margaret Alva in the Chair) Therefore, I feel that this matter should be gone into in a suitable forum. For that, we will have to create a congenial atmosphere and they have to sit across the table and decide all these things. Only that much I can spell out at this juncture. The details are to be worked out.

I am only saying that you are putting across your own facts and figures, from your angle. Our friends have got their own facts and figures. We are capable of resolving it through a definite forum. But he has referred to the Upper Tunga basin. When I was the Chief Minister, I sanctioned that project. Our argument to this problem is that out of our share of water allotted by Bachawat Award, we presume that we have got every right to use our own water. Similarly when you take up Srisailam Project or Nagarjuna Sagar Project or some other projects, you presume that you can do so. So, the ground realities are to be gone into by the Tribunal, which is going to be constituted by you. In the meanwhile, let us create a congenial atmosphere. You may please have that Tribunal. For Cauvery waters, it is there, but still the matter is not resolved. Even now, in case a Tribunal is created under the Act of 1955, it may take time; what I feel is that you may have to take confidence building measures, which is required. This is how I see that matter.

I am highly thankful to Shri Yerrannaidu for having initiated the debate. I know that we are all working together.

   

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Will you yield for a minute?

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : Why not? After all, we are friends; you have got every right.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : I would like to quote the Supreme Court judgement on Krishna river. It said:

"The allocation of water in River Krishna was en bloc and not project-wise, excepting those specific projects mentioned in clause 9 and clause 10."

 

 Clauses 9 and 10 deal with Tungabhadra dam and Upper Tunga basin.

MADAM CHAIRMAN : You have spoken already. Let the Minister reply to whatever he says. He will reply to that Member.

Shri Bangarappa, please conclude soon.

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : Yes. After all, he is our friend.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: That is okay. He may be your friend, but he has spoken already. You may speak and conclude. You can discuss the rest afterwards, outside.

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : I have respect for our friends.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: You may address the Chair.

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : What I would appeal is that they may allay the apprehension. In fact, we are prepared to talk it over. They should also be prepared to talk over, under the leadership of the Central Government. I appeal to the hon. Prime Minister that he must try to take a decision. Mr. Minister, I request you to persuade the Prime Minister. After all, he is the leader of the country. The Prime Minister of the country is the leader of the country. I am appealing to the hon. Prime Minister; we have got faith in his leadership.

This reminds me of a proverb mentioned by Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru, ‘Success goes to those who dare and act, seldom goes to timid’. Let not your Government become a timid. It should dare and act. It should call all the parties concerned and get success. Of course, it is very difficult. Success has many fathers whereas failure is an orphan. The Government should prepare to get the success by becoming father. Be the father of the nation, call all the parties concerned and sit across the table and make them agree on a point based on the ground realities. Let everybody put forward his case. Become a brave person. Success goes to those who dare and act and seldom goes to timid. You are waiting for a timid success. Your Government is a timid Government. You should become strong and get success. Be a father. … (Interruptions)

MADAM CHAIRMAN : You have already spoken.… (Interruptions)

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : You are accusing the Government of India all the time. You should advise your Chief Minister that he should stop accusing the Government of India. Then only it is possible. Day-in-day-out you go on accusing the Government of India.… (Interruptions)

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Shri Dhananjaya Kumar, I have not allowed you to speak. Please sit down. You have already spoken for 40 minutes. Shri Bangarappa, no cross conversation. Please address the Chair.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : Shri Yerrannaidu, I appeal to you to avoid making certain remarks. As a friend, I appeal to you to eschew that approach. You have said that Karnataka has started cheating and blackmailing. Certainly it is not true. You are our good friend. We are not going to cheat you.… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Why I had used that word was, CWC had given one figure.… (Interruptions)

   

MADAM CHAIRMAN: You cannot answer him on every point. Nothing will go on record.

(Interruptions) … * MADAM CHAIRMAN: Whatever is unparliamentary, has been removed from the record. So, you please carry on. There is no time. There are eight speakers more. Please do not get involved in arguments with him.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : I did not say that he had used unparliamentary words or something like that. I just want to appeal, through you, to my friend, eschew that approach of making these remarks against either a party, a leader or a Government.… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Instead of cheating, I will add the word misleading.… (Interruptions)

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : By softening our attitude, let us create a congenial atmosphere for the Government of India. In that congenial atmosphere, all the parties concerned should sit round the table, exchange the views and come to a decision. This is all I wanted to say. As far as details are concerned, I have got very-many details, facts and figures; how many projects are there; how the matter went to the Supreme Court wherein our application is pending. This is not a forum to go into all these details. Thank you very much.

       

* Not Recorded DR. S. VENUGOPAL : Madam, since 2.00 o’clock this august House is witnessing the water politics and the games of the Government. A number of senior parliamentarians are here. All of them have got not less than 20-25 years’ experience with them. All the previous speakers except hon. Janardhana Reddy have spoken politely and given advice to both the States and criticise the Central Government.

Madam, what for are we discussing this matter under Rule 193 today? This is to appeal, through you, to the Central Government as well as to Smt. Sonia Gandhi to issue instructions to the Government of Karnataka to stop illegal constructions, as has been mentioned by my leader, in order to save the people of Andhra Pradesh in all the basins. It is not a question of just one basin.

Madam, Shri Jalappa did not mention all the facts and figures about the Krishna Water Dispute Tribunal. He simply mentioned about a few projects, namely, SLBC, SRBC, TGP and a few others. It has already been mentioned that the State of Andhra Pradesh is a lower riparian State and the State of Karnataka is an upper riparian State. So, whatever dam is being constructed by the State of Andhra Pradesh, it is not going to adversely affect the State of Karnataka.

Madam, Shri Jalappa mentioned about the SLBC project. The environment clearance for this project was obtained in the month of April in 1994. No forests were involved, hence forest clearance was not required. The Ministry of Environment and Forests comes into play only if forest clearance is required to be taken. It is a constitutional obligation and an administrative matter. For this project, no forest was involved and so forest clearance was not required for this project. There was no displacement of people involved in this project, hence no R&R was necessary. As per the Bachawat Tribunal Award -- the hon. Minister knows about it -- this project was based on 30 TMC ft. surplus water and it was not causing any harm to the State of Karnataka.

   

Madam, in case of SRBC project, 11 TMC ft.was from re-generation and 8 TMC ft. was re-allocated by the KC canal. This also was not going to harm the State of Karnataka. Such re-allocation was permitted by the Supreme Court. There are orders for it. Shri Yerrannaidu mentioned the facts about what the Government of Karnataka had submitted through their lawyers and how they had misled the CWC through their representatives. Total facts and figures to this effect are available. The SRBC project was cleared by the Planning Commission as well as by the CWC in the year 1981. Environment clearance for this project was obtained in March, 1996. Forest clearance was obtained in September, 1994 and R&R clearance was obtained in November, 1995.

Sir, in the case of the TGP project, as has been mentioned by the former Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh, Shri Janardhana Reddy -- I would not like to say anything about Shri Jalappa since we worked together as Ministers under Shri H.D. Deve Gowda – the environment clearance was obtained in the year 1988.… (Interruptions)

MADAM CHAIRMAN : Please do not interrupt.

DR. S. VENUGOPAL : Sir, the rights of the lower riparian States have to be protected. The hon. Minister is going to give the reply. I am only mentioning the facts… (Interruptions)

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Please do not interrupt. What is this cross-conversation going on?

DR. S. VENUGOPAL : Madam, this has been mentioned by his own party colleague Shri Janardhana Reddy and he cannot have any quarrel with his own party colleague… (Interruptions) There was an agreement during the times of the late Indira Gandhi, between the riparian States to share 15 TMC ft. of water between them. It has been mentioned in clause V of the Award that 29 TMC ft. of water should be allocated for the TGP project.

I think only three or four projects were mentioned by Shri R.L. Jalappa. He mentioned about Paragodu also. Though we first raised the issue of Paragodu, actually the problem now is with Tunga. Before I come to Tunga, I want to say a few words about Paragodu. Already most of the hon. Members who are present here must have seen these pictures of the project. I will send the particulars to you also, Madam. If the project is designed only for drinking water, how did you allot 20 to 25 proclainers on this side? Is this not a fact? Now they are saying that it is modified. But still they are keeping fifty years plan in mind. … (Interruptions)

MADAM CHAIRMAN : You cannot place pictures on the Table. You have to take permission from the Chair before you lay documents on the Table.

… (Interruptions)

DR. S. VENUGOPAL : Later on, after the Government of Andhra Pradesh raised objections to this, they simply withdrew the word ‘irrigation’. But, still, as per the Assembly proceedings…… (Interruptions)

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : Do you mean to say that instead of 30 or more proclainers, only one should be there? … (Interruptions)

MADAM CHAIRMAN: You are stopping your own Member from speaking. You are disturbing him. Dr. Venugopal, are you yielding? If you are yielding, then you sit down.

DR. S. VENUGOPAL: I am just presenting the facts and figures. I am not accusing anybody. Shri Bangarappa, you have served the State as the hon. Chief Minister. You have got enormous experience. Do you not find any difference in a project which is meant for drinking water from a project that is meant for irrigation? Is there any necessity to keep 20 to 25 proclainers to commence the project and to irrigate 589 acres of land as per the admission of your own Minister for Minor Irrigation, Kumar Bangarappa on the floor of the Assembly? They have told the august Assembly that they cannot stop the Paragodu project. Only temporarily they will stop the project and they will continue the project and irrigate 589 acres. Later, after our raising this issue, the Chief Minister of Karnataka….… (Interruptions)

MADAM CHAIRMAN: You are not supposed to raise the proceedings of an Assembly here. Please remember that.

DR. S. VENUGOPAL : This is a clear-cut violation of the KWDT Award by the Karnataka Government.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Assembly proceedings are not discussed in this House. It is a privileged document. You cannot raise it here.

DR. S. VENUGOPAL : You may please see the Upper Tunga project and other projects taken up by the Karnataka Government. Already our leader has mentioned that it is a clear-cut and illegal violation of the KWDT Award. As per the Upper Tunga project, the utilisation in terms of TMC is 12.24; Singattlur/Himmagi – 18.55; Basapur Lift – 0.60; Sasalwad Lift – 0.55; T.B. Dam foreshore Lift – 2.00; and Upper Bhadra – 42.00. Thus, it totals up to 75.94 TMC. But you see the actual allocation as per the KWDT Award (LLC) is 24 TMC. As against this they are drawing 32.5 TMC. It is not on the basis of prorata allocation. During 1990-91, their RB LLC entitlement was 19.900 TMC and their prorata entitlement was 26.948 TMC whereas the actual drawl was 30.499 TMC.

17.00 hrs. (Shri Devendra Prasad Yadav in the Chair) The Ayacut irrigated area comes to about 12,9981 acres. If you see the prorata entitlement of Ayacut areas, you may find that the Karnataka Government has been totally misleading and has been giving false figures even to the court. They are not yielding to the court verdict and are misleading the CWC. By this way, they have got permission for the Upper Tunga Project.

I appeal to the august House to kindly release water because we are above politics and we are discussing this issue under Rule 193 rising above politics. I request the Congress leaders who are having 20 to 25 years of seniority and service to see that water is released. Through this august House, I am appealing to them because their Government is ruling in Karnataka.

डॉ. रघुवंश प्रसाद सिंह :आप सैंट्रल गवर्नमैंट के बारे में कहिये।…( व्यवधान)

डॉ.एस.वेणुगोपाल: सैंट्रल गवर्नमैंट के बारे में भी कह सकते हैं। यह ज्यूडशियरी एप्लीकेशन है इसलिए हम निवेदन कर रहे हैं। हम सोनिया जी से निवेदन कर रहे हैं, कांग्रेस पार्टी से निवेदन कर रहे हैं, श्री शिवराज पाटिल जी से निवेदन कर रहे हैं। At least, you can request the Chief Minister of Karnataka to stop all illegal constructions which they are proceeding with.

We are demanding that clearance given by the CWC to Upper Tunga Project must be cancelled. The Karnataka Government must immediately be directed to stop construction of all the illegal projects like Upper Tunga, Singatlur LI, Basapur LI, Sasalvad LI and Upper Bhadra Project, etc. in Tungabhadra basin. The Karnataka Government must immediately stop unauthorised irrigation and excess drawals in RDS. The Government of India must transfer the management control of RDS from Karnataka to the Tungabhadra Board. Karnataka should be directed to strictly adhere to the Agreements of 1892 and 1933 and stop all the illegal constructions in Pennar Basin.

I would request the Central Government to direct the Karnataka Government to release water stored without any purpose in Almatti and Narayanpur Dams for the downstream projects of Andhra Pradesh which are starving for want of water for the last two years. I also request the Central Government to direct the Karnataka Government to restrict its utilisations in Manjira sub-basin of Godavari basin to that of its allocation under GWDT Award.

SHRI A.P. JITHENDER REDDY (MAHABUBNAGAR): Sir, I thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak.

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : What is the state of your Government?

SHRI A.P. JITHENDER REDDY : First of all, I would like to say about you and then I would say about the Government.

Sir, it is surprising to see that our colleagues from Karnataka are coming out in a very defensive way. They are telling us that they are our brothers and we are all friends..… (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : Do you want us to say that you are our enemy?… (Interruptions)

SHRI A.P. JITHENDER REDDY : They are saying this because they are utilising the total water, their belly has completely filled up and are utilising more than the water which has been allocated to them. If only, as Shri Bangarappa said … (Interruptions)

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : I am claiming that you are my brother. Are you objecting to it? … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Shri Bangarappa, he is not yielding. Please take your seat.

SHRI A.P. JITHENDER REDDY : As Shri Bangarappa just said, Krishna River is starting from Mahabaleshwar from Maharashtra. About 560 TMC of water is allotted to them, 700 TMC is allotted to Karnataka and 800 TMC is allotted to Andhra Pradesh. If Maharashtra themselves would have utilised more water from Krishna, their areas would have objected to it and their water would not have come into Karnataka from Maharashtra, would it be the same way they would have spoken, Sir? They are telling us now that we will solve the problem today and let us go to the CWC. But today, on this particular issue, our colleague from Andhra Pradesh, Shri Yerrannaidu has already placed the facts and figures.

I say that this amounts to planned, and organised cold blooded murder of the agriculturists of Andhra Pradesh because of not supplying water by the Karnataka Government. … (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : Sir, we object to it. This statement should be expunged. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Which word?

… (Interruptions)

SHRI A.P. JITHENDER REDDY : I am not yielding. … (Interruptions) I have not yielded. … (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : Mr. Chairman, Sir, I want a ruling from you whether it is expunged or not. … (Interruptions)

सभापति महोदय : अनपार्लियामैंट्री शब्द को एक्सपंज कर दिया जाएगा।

SHRI SHIVRAJ V. PATIL (LATUR): That statement should not go on record. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: I have already expunged it.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI A.P. JITHENDER REDDY : I would like to say one thing about my district, Mahabubnagar. RDS canal is a canal which comes from the Thungabadra. 850 cusecs of water is released. But today we know that from Mahabubnagar, the agriculturists who are supposed to be there, who are proud of doing agriculture in Mahabubnagar district, who were nearly irrigating 87,500 acres of land are only irrigating 30,000 acres of land today. … (Interruptions)

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : I want to say a thing.

MR. CHAIRMAN: He is not yielding. Please take your seat.

SHRI A.P. JITHENDER REDDY : It has been said and it is on record also that from 1985 to 2001, the State of Karnataka was supposed to utilise 1.10 tmc of water. It is recorded – this is their Board draft – as per this draft, they are using 3.70 tmc of water from the RDS. Whereas Mahabubnagar district which is supposed to use 15.90 tmc of water is actually using just 7.8 tmc of water. 5,900 acres of the State of Karnataka are supposed to have been irrigated, but 22,500 acres of land are being irrigated today. It is on record. They are paying taxes to the Government. If they want they can verify it from the tax records.

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : Will you please yield?

SHRI A.P. JITHENDER REDDY : Yes, I will yield because you said you are my brother.

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : One dam was constructed across the Thungabadra river. According to the agreement arrived at between the concerned States, that is Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, two-thirds of the total water available in Thungabadra dam goes to Andhra Pradesh and only one-third of the water goes to Karnataka. See our sacrifice! You must appreciate us. Why do you not appreciate all these things? … (Interruptions)

SHRI A.P. JITHENDER REDDY : Do not tell about your sacrifice. … (Interruptions) When the water from the perennial rivers, Thunga and Badra comes into the Thungabadra dam, they release water to the RDS canal, only when it reaches 102 FRL. I would like to ask a very simple question. They have got anicut of 11.9 tmc on Thunga and 3.9 tmc on Badra. Now, when they raise the level from 11.9 tmc to 47 tmc and from 3.9 tmc to 18 tmc, how do you think the water will come into Thungabadra dam? How can they supply water to RDS canal? How will Mahabubnagar district get 15.9 tmc of water? How will KC canal get 39.9 tmc of water? These are all facts. Today, the Karnataka Government is trying to really see that the Andhra Pradesh agriculturists die. In my constituency, 30 lakh people were there. Today, 14 lakh people have left my district.

           

Today, 14 lakh agriculturists have left my district because there is no irrigation facility. They have left the place and gone to other States for employment.

We say that agriculture is the life-line and backbone of India. Today, we say that India is depending on agriculture. If this type of irrigation facility is provided to the agriculturists, how will they survive? The Congress people were trying to say that the Telugu Desam Government today is a failure in Andhra Pradesh. I would like to put a very simple question. When they were in power, why did they not build the Jurala Project which was designed for storage of 17.84 TMC of water? Why did they limit it to 6 TMC of water only? Is this not their fault? … (Interruptions) My friends, why did you not allow water to come to this dam? Why did you not complete the work of the dam? Why did you not build that project on that day? Today, whatever is being carried forward is only because of the work not done during the last 45 years. That Government had not done the work properly. I would, therefore, request the hon. Minister of Water Resources to look into these matters. I would request him to give proper guidance to the CWC and all the illegal lift irrigation systems, which are there, have to be stopped. Water has to be given properly to each and every district. The agriculturists have to be saved. If water is not given properly, then the water war is going to take place in this country and nobody can stop it.

I would, therefore, request that the Tribunal should be constituted immediately. Everybody should be allowed to participate in this Tribunal. Public hearing should also be given for this.

With these words, I conclude and I thank you very much for giving me this opportunity to speak.… (Interruptions)

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : I would like to state that in the Tungabhadra dam, 30 per cent of water is silted up. That quantity of water is going to Andhra Pradesh and nobody talks about that aspect.… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : It is shared according pro rata basis. The capacity of the Tungabhadra dam is 212 TMC feet of water. Due to siltation, its capacity was reduced to 170 TMC feet of water. We are distributing it on pro rata basis. For that, there is no problem. If that is silted, there is no water. Andhra Pradesh’s share is 60 per cent. Our quantity is further reduced. … (Interruptions) Their quantity is also reduced. It is done on a pro rata basis. … (Interruptions)

DR. V. SAROJA : Sir, with due respect to Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, I would like to put forth some facts. I thank you very much for giving me this opportunity to place our Party’s views on this specific subject.… (Interruptions) Today, the discussion is regarding sharing of inter-State river water between the States of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka. On behalf of my Party, the All-India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, we support the sentiments of Andhra Pradesh.… (Interruptions) We respect the sentiments of the people of Andhra Pradesh which were expressed by the leader of the TDP Shri K. Yerrannaidu.… (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : This is the next Party to be in the NDA Government!… (Interruptions)

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : Dr. V. Saroja, what about drinking water? Maharashtra and Karnataka gave you water but you did not want to thank us.… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : They are pleading for justice.… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Shri Yerrannaidu, you are a senior leader of your Party. Please do not disturb the proceedings.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : I have got highest respects for the hon. Member. She has thanked Andhra Pradesh. But Karnataka and Maharashtra each gave 5 TMC feet of drinking water to her State under the same Award. Why should she not thank Maharashtra and Karnataka?… (Interruptions)

DR. V. SAROJA : I would like to thank the Chair for giving us an opportunity to start a separate discussion under Rule 193 regarding the Cauvery water dispute between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu.

               

Sir, it will come shortly and the House will be prepared to discuss the Cauvery water dispute between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. This is a separate issue.

Thirdly, I would only point to this august House that it should realize the mentality of the Government of Karnataka. The water dispute has not been a recent one, it has been there for years together, whether the Centre was ruled by the Congress Government or by the NDA Government or any other party Government but the inter-State water disputes are not being settled. Sir, what is the problem? How are we going to discuss this problem? How are we going to settle this? If we are not having the mindset to understand each other, how do you think we are going to raise this issue in WTO where agriculture is going to be one of the major subjects, where all the Asian countries are looking forward and India will dare to talk to protect the interests of agriculture not only of India but also of other Asian countries?. This is one question.

Secondly, as far as the inter-linking of rivers is concerned, Shri Dhananjaya Kumar was appreciating the Government of India and also the hon. Prime Minister for this initiative. We do appreciate the hon. Prime Minister for initiating the project of inter-linking of rivers. Sir, mere words will not suffice to quench the thirst of the water disputes. Even with regard to inter-linking of rivers, we have constituted many Committees, even today we are not able to discuss anything here. We have been kept in the dark about the observations made by these different Committees and as to where we are standing and when the inter-linking of rivers will take place and when the water disputes will be settled. In this connection, I would request the hon. Prime Minister to come out clearly and also request the hon. Water Resources Minister to keep us informed where do we stand and what is the role of individual States in inter-linking of rivers and in the solution of inter-State water disputes.

All the problems started from the year 1974 and in case of Andhra Pradesh it started even before that. I would request the hon. leaders from Congress Party who have ruled India for long years and also now they are ruling in the States that let us discuss it.

I would also like to draw the attention of this august House that the hon. Chief Minister of Karnataka has given a statement on 1.5.2003 at Tirupati. In a Press Statement, he has mentioned "We will settle the issues only by dialogue and bilateral discussion". We do agree to that. When will that peaceful agreement take place? I would like to know this from the Chief Minister of Karnataka through the MPs sitting here. When will the lower riparian States get their rightful share? Sir, it is the 28th time the Cauvery water dispute is going here and there and till now we are not able to settle it and now the Monitoring Committee is going to meet. I would like to ask as to what would be the solution through this Monitoring Committee which will be meeting shortly. Already the Press reports are there that this Monitoring Committee is only an eye-wash. The hon. Prime Minster had stated that he is going to convene a meeting of the Monitoring Committee on 7.8.2003. I really have my own doubt that how the problem that has not been settled for such a long time is going to be settled within a short period of time and how the mindset is going to be changed to adopt a give and take policy in this water dispute. If this happens, I will be the happiest person.

But at the same time, illegal construction of dams are going on in the upper riparian State, especially Karnataka, causing injustice to the lower riparian State.

Sir, I would like to draw the attention of this august House to the international law for protection of the rights of the lower riparian States. The State of Karnataka should either abide by the international law in order to protect the welfare of the farmers of the lower riparian States, which is not happening for decades together, or, at least, they should obey the orders of the Supreme Court, the Interim Awards given by the Tribunals, the orders given by the Monitoring Committee and the CWC’s directives. Nothing is being followed. Instead, they are going in for illegal construction of dams. I feel that nothing can control the State of Karnataka. So, what will be the plight of the farmers of the lower riparian States? Is it that within India the lower riparian States would not be given their rightful share of water that is due to them?

Sir, I would rather have no hesitation in saying that there is no political will on the part of the Government of India to find an amicable solution so as to give the rightful share of water that is due to the lower riparian States like us. At the same time, I would also urge upon the Government of India that they cannot do any more injustice to us. I would even caution the national parties, the NDA and also the Congress Party that the regional parties are going to decide the fate of the next Government. So, what will be the fate of both the BJP and the Congress Party? I would urge upon the Government that they have to protect the rights of the lower riparian States. … (Interruptions)

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : Mr. Chairman, Sir, whenever the hon. Prime Minister convenes the meeting of the Monitoring Committee, the hon. Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu is not attending it. … (Interruptions)

DR. V. SAROJA : Sir, I am not yielding to him. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Shri Dhananjaya Kumar, she is not yielding. Please take your seat.

… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Nothing will go on record except the speech of Dr. Saroja.

(Interruptions) …* DR. V. SAROJA : Sir, we are the affected people. We, from Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, are from lower riparian States. We are having the problem of drinking water also in our State. I would appeal to all the hon. Members of this * Not Recorded     august House that we should all sit together and find a solution in order to give justice to lower riparian States. There is no question of going to court any more as the State of Karnataka is not abiding by the directions of the court.

So, I would appeal to the hon. Prime Minister to find a solution in the Monitoring Committee which is going to meet on 7.8.2003. He has to find a solution. Otherwise, I would like to caution both the national parties that they would have to face the consequences in the forthcoming parliamentary elections. With these words, I conclude.

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : Mr. Chairman, Sir, probably she wants that all the dams in Karnataka should be emptied and water should be released to their State. That is why they are supporting the NDA Government. … (Interruptions)

       

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA: Sir, I have listened for the last three-and-a-half hours to the many arguments which have been put forth by my colleagues from Andhra Pradesh, trying to prove that Andhra Pradesh has been wronged by Karnataka. Of course, there have been bandwagon followers who have tried to support them by trying to say something is wrong with us.

It is unfortunate, whether it is Cauvery, Krishna, Godavari or Narmada, these inter-State river disputes, particularly with the emergence of regional parties, are beginning to become vote-bank rivers. Whenever elections approach, suddenly, I am asking Shri Yerrannaidu, why were you silent all the time … … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : No, no; The Chief Minister of Karnataka is playing politics. … (Interruptions) The Government of Karnataka is playing politics. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Please take your seat.

… (Interruptions)

DR. S. VENUGOPAL : Karnataka is playing a dual game. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Dr. Venugopal, please take your seat.

… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Madam, please address the Chair.

… (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : I will speak in my way, not Shri Bangarappa’s way nor Shri Yerrannaidu’s way. I have a right to speak in the House. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Nothing should go on record except what Shrimati Margaret Alva says.

(Interruptions) …* * Not Recorded     SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : There has been drought in all the southern States over the last three or four years. Karnataka also had problems with water. It is not that only Andhra Pradesh has had problems. I do want to point out that even this year out of 25 or 27 districts, 15 districts of Karnataka – according to the Central Government’s Report – do not have the annual minimum rainfall. We are still getting fodder from Punjab and Haryana. We have been asking for rakes to carry it. We are pleading for ‘Food for Work’ grains from the Central Government because there is no work for thousands of our people on the rural side because of lack of rain and no plantation work going on. These are the facts.

I am only saying that whether they are farmers on the Andhra Pradesh side, the Tamil Nadu side or the Karnataka side or in Pondicherry, these are Indian farmers. What they produce feeds the country, and not only Andhra Pradesh or Karnataka. We do realise that there are problems and they are all our people. When I say ‘our people’, you say: "Do not call us brothers. Do not call us something else." I still say: "The farmers in this country are all our farmers and helping them is the duty of everybody." I do not deny it. But you cannot politicise or bring in imaginary or other charges against any other Government simply because you want to prove a point in this House. You may have a problem. I share it with you. I am not saying that you have no problem. But it is important in a country like this, where we are a federal system, to understand the problems of different Governments. We have different party Governments. We have different approaches. But the basic issue is: "Is there enough water and where is the water available?" Each State is trying to make the maximum use of what it has.

You have made a number of charges, Shri Yerrannaidu and others. I am not answering individually. All I can say is that ‘you’, as everybody else has said, hold the key to this Government. What you want, you get. … (Interruptions) Let me speak.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Please take your seat.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM : Sir, it is not related to the discussion under Rule 193. … (Interruptions)

SHRI T.M. SELVAGANPATHI : Who is politicising now?

… (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : It is related to this question.

SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM : This is not a Karnataka-Andhra issue… (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : The whole issue today lies in the court of the Ministry of Water Resources. The Water Resources Ministry has to find the final answer to the problem. I refuse to say that they have not done anything. They have sent teams. They have made assessments. Shri Yerrannaidu and other speakers have been repeatedly saying that Karnataka has been feeding wrong information to the Central Government… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Yes… (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Please take your seats.

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : Can I answer it? Sir, today is the day not only of the Ministry, but today is an age in which you have satellites. You have every single scientific method of mapping even flow of water. You can even map underground water. If Karnataka is misleading them, I am sure this Ministry is quite capable of finding out the facts, use the latest scientific methods and come out with the facts. So, I would request them not to make general statements because they may have an interpretation, we may have an interpretation. They have sent teams. They have been satisfied and they have cleared certain projects. It is for them, now, ultimately to say what has gone right and what has gone wrong. This is all that I am trying to say. Let us not trade charges. Leave it to the assessments, which must scientifically be made.

Sir, I do want to put certain facts. They may like them, they may not like them. But I am quoting here the State-wise land use, classification and irrigation statistics provided by the Central Water Commission, February 2000. I took it from the Government of India publication.

SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM : You must read out the statistics provided by the State of Karnataka… (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : I am reading both. He should not tell me what to read. I will read what I want to read… (Interruptions)

SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM : I have every right to say it… (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : The Chair can tell me. I am not answering him at all.

In Karnataka, the total cultivable area is 31,887 thousand acres. Andhra Pradesh has 39,270 thousand acres and Tamil Nadu has 20,594 thousand acres of cultivable land.

I am coming to the net irrigated area which again is the Government of India figures. The net irrigated area in Karnataka is 5,688 thousand acres, in Andhra Pradesh it is 10,188 thousand acres; and in Tamil Nadu it is 6,487 thousand acres… (Interruptions) This is the irrigation picture given by the Government of India. It is their publication.

Again, according to this report.

SHRI KALAVA SRINIVASULU : Would she please quote Godavari figures also?

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : I am just saying that these are their figures.

I only want to say that as far as Krishna water dispute is concerned, it arose in 1960. The Krishna Water Tribunal was constituted in 1969, gave its report in 1973 and the further report, that is, the final report was given in 1976 apportioning the Krishna waters in two parts. There was Scheme A and Scheme B. The Scheme A became final as a decision, which was published on 31st may 1976, by the Union Government under section 6 of the Inter Water Disputes Act. After it became final, it became binding on everybody.

According to it, Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh were given allocations, which were: 560 TMC to Maharashtra, 700 TMC to Karnataka and 800 TMC to Andhra Pradesh. This has been the allocation and has become binding.

Then, there was Scheme B. Scheme B, was not made part of the final order. The surplus water of 330 TMC, that is over and above 2,060 TMC, which has been allocated was to be distributed among the riparian States, that is, Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh.

Allocations that were made to Maharashtra 25 per cent , to Karnataka 50 per cent and to Andhra Pradesh 25 per cent . Now, the scheme ‘B’ was not made part of the Order and the Tribunal observed that its implementation could be done by constituting an Inter State River Authority either by agreement or by law made by Parliament.

The Tribunal held that the State of Andhra Pradesh would have the "liberty to use" the surplus waters without acquiring any rights - that had been made clear - until scheme ‘B’ was enforced by constituting the Tribunal. Sir, the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in OS No.1, filed in 1997, filed by Karnataka interpreted "liberty to use". I am very specific and I am quoting from the Judgement. "Liberty to use" surplus water was interpreted by its judgement dated 25.4.2000 and it held that such uses cannot be by constructing any large-scale and permanent projects. This is the judgement of the Supreme Court and I quote it to you.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : That was dismissed by the Supreme Court.

DR. S. VENUGOPAL : It is a dismissed petition. You yield Madam.

MR. CHAIRMAN : She is not yielding Shri S. Venugopal. Please take your seat.

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : It was not dismissed. Justice Pattanaik directed the Union Government to act in this regard.

DR. S. VENUGOPAL : This is a dismissed petition Madam.… (Interruptions) You kindly go through the petition.

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : Subsequently, the Chief Minister of Karnataka wrote to the Government of India asking in January 2001 for immediate steps to stop projects taken up by Andhra Pradesh so that it does not create these projects for utilisation of surplus water and also for setting up the Tribunal. In a reply from the hon. Minister which the Government of Karnataka received on 22.2.2001 – it is from the Minister of Water Resources – he admitted that the Telugu Ganga Project and the Srisailam Left Bank Canal are "unapproved projects". He, i.e. the Government of India, has admitted in his letter. But, he does not say anything about stopping them. This is what Karnataka has been saying. You have said they are unapproved. So, stop them but they have not stopped them. There are two requests that Government of Karnataka has made. First is constituting the Tribunal, as required by the Supreme Court in its judgement and second, stop Andhra Pradesh from building the new projects which are not approved by the Central Government. Sir, instead of that, they go on saying we are constructing illegal projects. They do not talk about the letter of the Union Government which they are supporting. You are the ones, you get all the patronage from them and not us. But when they state the correct facts and admit that these are unapproved projects which Andhra Pradesh is constructing.… (Interruptions) I have limited time. Let them not disturb me. I am only giving the facts from the judgement.

Sir, the Upper Tunga Project is, I say, absolutely lawful because we are allowed to utilise the water and only 12.2 TMC is being used by us. The Central Water Commission has granted us the clearances between 1993 and 2002 for this project. Everything has been cleared by the Central Water Commission on every single issue. Utilisation of 12.2 TMC is within the total allocation of 320 TMC permitted to us under the Tunga Sub-Basin and 734 TMC permitted to us under the earlier allocation under scheme ‘A’ in Krishna Basin.

Sir, the Supreme Court in O.S.I. of 1997, while rejecting similar allegations of Andhra Pradesh regarding Almatti dam, has categorically held that the allocations of the Tribunal are not project-wise but mass allocations. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Your name is also in the list. Please take your seat.

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : Sir, they have all spoken for one hour. Please allow me to give the reply. Please give me five more minutes.

The clearance once granted by the Union Government is not liable to be withdrawn. Once official clearances have been given, there is no provision for withdrawal, which they are now demanding. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : If it is illegal, is there any problem for withdrawal? … (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : It has been sanctioned by the Central Government. I have all the provisions. We have them on record. You can challenge it. We are also, therefore, asking for the Tribunal. It is 11 months since my Chief Minister has written that the Tribunal be constituted. We have no Tribunal. You want the Tribunal. We want the Tribunal. Shri Chandrababu Naidu has so much influence in Delhi. Please get him to have the Tribunal constituted. We are with you on it. We will join you to ask the Minister. You have announced a Tribunal outside. Please constitute it. What is the problem? … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Madam, please conclude.

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA: Sir, everybody has got 30 minutes or more. I am the only one who is replying to the points that they have raised. Please permit me to finish.

Then comes the question of the release of water from Almatti dam. The demand of Andhra Pradesh for release of waters from Almatti dam was totally unjustified and illegal because the utilisation under Upper Krishna Project is confined to 173 tmc of water by constructing Almatti dam upto 519 metres as directed by the Supreme Court in its judgement of 2000. Sir, after storing the above required water, the remaining water available in the Krishna river, went down to Andhra Pradesh to feed its massive reservoirs at Srisailam and Nagarjunasagar and Jurala dams.

When the demand was made by Andhra Pradesh for more water, the combined storage positions in Andhra Pradesh – let them deny it – was 245 tmc while in Karnataka it was only 113 tmc and still they said: "We are not leaving water". The facts and figures are with the Central Water Commission. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : You come and see our reservoirs. … (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : I am talking of the figures with the Central Water Commission. You challenge them with the Commission. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : We are welcoming. … (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : Sir, as far as the Paragodu Project is concerned, a lot of things have been said. I am not going into the details because you are restricting me but I do want to say that the present utilisation of 0.9 tmc by Karnataka in Chitravathi including Paragodu Project are well within the share of Karnataka on equitable apportionment of Chitravati and Pennar waters. Karnataka’s share here is not less than 2 tmc out of 2.74 tmc of available water. … (Interruptions)

Drinking water supply has the highest priority in all the schemes and does not require clearances from anywhere. We have not done any irrigation under this project. It has been clearly used for drinking water.

Then, there is the whole issue that they are quoting of 1892 and 1933 agreements between the Princely States and the British Government. I want to point out that these were terminated by the provisions of Section 7 (i) of the Indian Independence Act of 1947 and, therefore, the agreements cannot be used today as the basis for their arguments. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : The Government of India has clarified through a letter that the agreements are still in force. … (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI MARGARET ALVA : Let the Minister reply. I am waiting for the Minister’s reply. … (Interruptions)

The agreement of 1892 incorporates an archaic principle of "prescriptive rights" against upper riparian Mysore whereas it is a universally accepted position that this does not run upstream. Sir, I only want to say on Godavari that the Krishna Tribunal permitted diversion of 80 tmc of Godavari waters to Krishna basin through the Pollavaram project in Andhra Pradesh.

Out of this water, Karnataka has been allocated 23 tmc ft. However, so far, the CWC has not cleared this Pollavaram project. The undue delay for 25 years has deprived Karnataka of its share of 23 tmc all along. Please accept this fact on the Godavari river.

We are being called the unfriendly neighbour, whether it is Dr. Saroja, whether it is Shri Yerrannaidu or my colleague from the other party in Tamil Nadu. I just want to point out that Karnataka is an upper riparian State to Andhra Pradesh in Krishna basin, to Tamil Nadu in Cauvery basin, to Kerala in some west flowing rivers and to Goa in the Mahadhayi river. It is not our fault if we have been placed somewhere. This is God’s doing, not my doing. I want to quote from a chapter from international law on the history of water disputes around the world. It says:

"Whenever upper riparians, taking advantage of the new high dam technology, propose the utilisation of waters in upland dry areas, the lower riparian States invariably come out with a crying face to protect the natural or undiminished flows in the guise of maintaining its historical uses, developed by taking advantage of the topography of the land; and the lower riparians, contrary to the public and media impression do not believe in equitable utilisation or appropriation of waters but they believe in natural flow theory. So, the lower riparian States refuse to recognise the rights of the upper riparian States grabbing the entire waters of the river."

 

 Finally, I do want to say this. As I said earlier, elections are coming and therefore suddenly issues are getting politicised. It is no solution to use the misery of the people for vote bank politics. Do not do it. It is not good. You are to prove to the people of Andhra Pradesh that you have looked after your people and that you have done something for them. Where has the Rs.65,000 crores which you got for Andhra Pradesh gone? Only a few flyovers for a few crores of rupees have come up. The people in the rural side are those who send you to Parliament. You blame the Congress Government in Karnataka, blame my leader and blame the people of Karnataka and start marching into our areas but the people are smart enough to know that you have failed to protect the interests of the State in not using your influence with the Central Government to find a solution which is acceptable to everybody.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Sir, if you permit, I would speak for a minute.

MR. CHAIRMAN : You have already spoken. Hon. Members of your party are going to speak.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU: It is all right, Sir.

           

SHRI KALAVA SRINIVASULU (ANANTAPUR): Respected Chairman, Sir, thank you for this opportunity.

I may be permitted to speak in Telugu.

*Respected Chairman Sir, Karnataka, which happens to be a neighbouring and upper riparian State, has been going ahead with the construction of various dams and projects without proper approval and thus depriving Andhra and especially Anantpur district its due share of water. Because of these constructions Rayalaseema, a chronically drought prone area and Anantpur district are totally deprived of water whether for irrigation or for drinking purpose. Is it a sin to be a lower riparian State? Because of the illegal construction of the projects in Karnataka, the entire life and economy of Rayalaseema has been ruined. After Jaisalmer it is only Anantpur which receives the lowest rainfall in the country. The Desert Development Programme is being implemented in that part of the country to provide some relief to the people. But here in our case there is nothing to rescue the people. We have no other source except the waters of Tungabhadra for irrigation purposes. That being the situation, the water from the lone source, Tungabhadra is being deprived now, with the illegal construction of various projects undertaken by Karnataka. In the upper portion of Tungabhadra reservoir, many projects which are not approved are coming up very fast. Grave injustice is being done to us. With the noble purpose of rescuing the people from recurring droughts, Tungabhadra reservoir was constructed before independence. But unfortunately, to make this reservoir ineffective, the construction of Upper Tunga project is now being taken up by the Karnataka Government. The Bachawat Tribunal has already rejected this project. Even then the construction is going on uninterruptedly. The plea of the Karnataka Government for approval of Upper Tunga project has been rejected by Bachawat Award.

__________________________________________________________________*.......* English translation of the speech originally delivered in Telugu.

Likewise, the survey work is now being undertaken by the Karnataka Government for the construction of Upper Bhadra project which was totally rejected by Bachawat Award. If these two projects are completed, the whole of Rayalaseema will turn to be a vast desert. There will be no human habitation in the region. Right now in Anantpur one can very clearly see the desert conditions cropping up. We are already being deprived to utilise the 212 tmc of water from Tungabhadra reservoir. We are losing no less than 30 tmc of water as of now. Water is not available to 30% of the Ayacut area for irrigation. The right canal of Tungabhadra flows through Anantpur. We are entitled to get 32.5 tmc of water but we have been getting only 26 tmc of water for the past one decade. The situation is so acute that we get 2-3 tmc of water from other projects for drinking purpose. How come that the Karnataka Government decided to undertake the construction of the project subjecting the already drought prone areas to more torture? Is it not inhuman? Is it not against the law? Is it not against the Constitution? We are the people who face the drought year after year. We have no other sources for irrigation. Poverty and unemployment is rampant in these areas. Human beings can no more expect to survive in these areas because of the construction of new projects by Karnataka. Conditions are no more congenial for the survival and mass exodus from these areas is the only alternative. Andhra Pradesh is an integral part of our country. The people living in Anantpur are also citizens of this great country. All the rights provided under the Indian Constitution are equally applicable to us also. Don't we have the right to live in this country? This is my straight question to the Central Government.

In a region where the farmers, who provide food for others, are themselves starving, where acute drought conditions prevail for 3 years in every 5 years, where greenfields are being replaced by vast stretches of sand, where thousands of agricultural labour migrate to other places along with their family members for their livelihood, where people are anxious to get some water for irrigation, where the people have no more tears left in their eyes to cry over fast drying up orchards, in such a place and region some more projects are being constructed by the Karnataka Government headed by Shri S.M. Krishna who belongs to Congress Party. The life in the area has become so miserable that it is beyond discription. In fact, the entire State Andhra Pradesh has been subjected to injustice. There is Bachawat award, there are rights conferred by the Constitution, there is a duly constituted Government at the Centre which respects the Constitution but in spite of all these our life continues to be miserable. In spite of so many Constitutional guarantees and awards, the construction of Upper Tunga Project is going on near Shimoga. It is going to have a capacity of nearly 40-60 tmc of water much against the allowed 12.24 tmc of water. Similarly, Singatalur Himmagi project with a capacity of 18.55 tmc is also being constructed by Karnataka. Other projects like Basapur lift irrigation project scheme with a capacity of 0.60 tmc, Sasalwada lift irrigation project with 0.55 tmc capacity, Thinga Bhadra Upper Dam Scheme project with 2 tmc and Upper Bhadra Dam, a diversion channel with 42 tmc capacity are coming up very fast without any formal approval by the concerned authorities. I fail to understand how the Central Water Commission is granting its approval for these projects which are meant to harm the interests of our people. Who is behind this conspiracy? Who are the people who are working against the interests of the people in Andhra Pradesh? Who are the persons depriving water for reservoirs constructed 40 years back? Sir, the truth must come out. A thorough study must be undertaken to bring the factual position to light. I demand that a high level study team should be constituted for the purpose. All the illegal construction work undertaken by the Karnataka State should be stopped at once. The entire matter should be handed over to the study team to make a thorough study. The team should study the entire Tunga Bhadra Basin area thoroughly. Inflow of water into all the canals of Tunga Bhadra in Karnataka should be regulated and controlled by only Tunga Bhadra Board. Authority to release water into canals should be regulated by Tunga Bhadra Board.* MR. CHAIRMAN : Hon Member Shri Srinivasulu, please conclude now.

*SHRI KALAVA SRINIVASULU : Sir, they referred to the friendly. We constructed a small channel like P. Byadegiri in Madakasira taluka in Anantapur district. That is under NEERU-MEERU programme........(Interruptions)

One minute Sir. They referred to our friendly relations between the two people. We constructed a small channel namely P. Badegere Channel in Madakasira with a cost of mere Rs 5 lakh. The constructoin was undertaken as a part of 'Neeru-Meeru' programme launched by Shri N. Chandrababu Naidu. Even for this small construction work, there was a hue and cry from across the other State. State Ministers, MPs and MLAs belonging to Karnataka protested vehemently claiming that this small project would go against their interests. Sir, when they crossed the border and entered our State, we welcomed them with garlands… (Interruptions).....* SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : Sir, it is highly incorrect. You should expunge it form the record…….(Interruptions)

सभापति महोदय : इण्टरप्शंस प्रोसीडिंग्स का पार्ट नही बनेंगे ।

........( Interruptions)…….** SHRI K.H. MUNIYAPPA : It is all false……(Interruptions)

DR. MANDA JAGNNATH : Sir, they are interrupting the hon. Member……(interruptions) MR. CHAIRMAN : I have already given the ruling.

……..(Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Shri Srinivasulu, please conclude now.

.*SHRI KALAVA SRINIVASULU : Paragodu project which costs Rs 9 crore adversely affects the supply of drinking water to nearly a thousand villages. We * * Not Recorded *.......* English translation of the speech originally delivered in Telgu protested. We met the DGP of Karnataka to allow an 8-Member delegation consisting of 2 MPs, 4 MLAs, 1 Zila Parishad Chairman and 1 Markfed Chairman to visit the construction site. He turned down the request and what is more, some of us were even handcuffed. The very hands that garlanded have been handcuffed by the Karnataka which is being ruled by Congress and headed by Shri S.M. Krishna. Political leaders and public representatives are taken into custody while participating in dharnas and agitations. But they will be let off immediately on bail. But in this case, we have been sent to Central Jail. We are not anti social elements. It shows their attitude towards Telugu people.

Hence I plead with the Central Government to see that Karnataka stops all illegal constructions of various projects. It should also see that Tungabhadra River Board is given all powers related to T.B. Basin. I appeal to do justice to all backward districts of Rayalaseema especially Anantapur. The construction of all projects including Paragodu should be stopped at once. Till then we will continue with mass agitations. I also take this opportunity to warn all those who underestimate the tears in the eyes and hunger in the stomachs of Telugu people. If no corrective measures are taken in time those who happen to be responsible for this unhappy situation may have to pay dearly. The Congress party which is ruling Karnataka will be the first one to suffer and the Central Government will be the next. They will be held responsible for all the future consequences and I am sure the enlightened people in the country would deliver justice to the aggrieved.

With these words, I conclude my speech.* 18.00 hrs. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Please take your seat. Please listen to me first. Shri Jalappa, you are a senior Member of the House, please take your seat.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI G.S. BASAVARAJ (TUMKUR) : It is not correct on his part that he is abusing us. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: Please listen to me. Twelve speakers have spoken so far, and there are twelve more Members in the list, who want to speak on this. So, I would request all the hon. Members to be very brief. If the House agrees, I will extend the time of the House by another one hour.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Yes.

SHRI G.S. BASAVARAJ : Please extend it by another two hours.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Now, I give the floor to Shri Deve Gowda.

SHRI H.D. DEVE GOWDA (KANAKPURA): Mr. Chairman, Sir, I am watching the proceedings of this House for the last four hours. My former colleague, Shri K. Yerrannaidu, has made a very powerful speech. I have no hesitation in saying that both sides want to get political mileage out of this. I came to the House only because this matter was listed in today’s agenda. Shri K. Yerrannaidu has made a very unreasonable attack on the Karnataka State.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : It was reasonable.

SHRI H.D. DEVE GOWDA : I do not want to make personal insinuations. He said that we were habitual offenders, and that hurts me. We have never disrespected the Tribunal Award. I will prove it one by one. We have never disrespected the Supreme Court’s direction. If my sister, Member of Parliament and the leader of the AIADMK, brings a motion under Rule 193, I will answer her every point, and tell you how Karnataka was sandwiched between the lower riparian States for the last 105 years. I do not want to narrate the history behind the two inter-state rivers: On one side, we have Maharashtra; on the other side, we have Andhra Pradesh, and we are in the middle.

Shri Janardhana Reddy, you were the Chief Minister once. You are attacking this Karnataka Government now. Though the demand for a Tribunal for implementing Scheme-B was made, you have not taken a decision even after a lapse of one year. You must be knowing that when the Karnataka demanded for a Tribunal in 1960, Shri K.L. Rao, who was the then Minister in charge of Irrigation, took nine years to complete Nagarjunasagar and to see that the gates are erected. It is a fait accompli, so far as Nagarjunasagar Project is concerned. After the completion of the Nagarjunasagar Project and the erection of gates in 1969, after a lapse of nine years, the Tribunal was constituted. (Interruptions) You are a senior Member, and I do not want to yield to you. I would like you to remember how the people of Karnataka have suffered. For nine long years, we struggled for a Tribunal, but we were unable to get any justice. There was no coalition Government -- there was no 23-party coalition Government or a 13-party coalition Government at that time. There was a single-party rule. You people were at the helm of affairs, and you must own the responsibility because during 1962-69, Karnataka suffered under the Congress rule.

I do not want to take any sides. My learned friend, Shri K. Yerrannaidu, should not have gone to the extent of saying that we were always going to dishonour the verdicts of the Supreme Court or the Tribunal. I can narrate the examples one by one to prove my point. Shri Yerrannaidu must admit his mistake also. I do not want to enter into any controversies.

In 1996 when we were in office, we took a decision to raise the height of the dam to 524 metres. That was done not to encroach upon the rights of Andhra Pradesh. I told Shri Chandrababu Naidu in the Steering Committee meeting that I was ready to give in writing that we would not use even a drop over and above the 173 TMC of water awarded by Justice Bachawat under Scheme A. He did not agree to that. Today, he says there is no water. Yes, there is scarcity of water everywhere because of either scanty rainfall or severe drought. It is the case everywhere, including Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh or Tamil Nadu. Two days back I was in Tamil Nadu. I myself saw that the entire riverbed was totally dry. I am not going to take sides.

Everybody must remember the fact that Karnataka has never dishonoured any award. Though the subject matter of discussion today pertains to Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, I would like to narrate a case to justify my statement that Karnataka has never, never, dishonoured the arbitration award. In 1992, an interim award was given for the first time in Indian history. Though there were several inter-State river water disputes - I can argue for hours together on this; Shri Mani Shankar Aiyar is here - for the first time in an inter-State river water dispute, an interim award was given in 1992. I do not want to question why that was done. I do not want to question the sanctity of the Tribunal. I would like to just mention that the interim award was given for the first time then.

My Chief Minister might be misbehaving. I am not going to advocate on his behalf because he is my Chief Minister. The Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu then went on a hunger strike. Within one week, the Government of India rushed to Tamil Nadu and tried to persuade the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu to withdraw from the hunger strike. Why do they say Karnataka has always gone against the law or thinks itself to be above the law? No, we are not above the law. The country must understand that Karnataka has never disobeyed the awards of tribunals or court verdicts. I want to make that clear here. Unfortunately, we are unable to manage the media well. Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu have got their own electronic media channels. They can put out their own versions. Karnataka is the only State which has tried to cater to the interests of lower riparian States. However, these types of messages are being conveyed through the so-called powerful electronic media by others. I know that we have failed in that. We do not own any electronic media unit.

In Karnataka, my Chief Minister also committed a mistake. Where is the need to go on a padayatra? Has it not given an impression to the general public that we had gone outside the purview of the Constitutional institutions? I admit that it was a wrong step on the part of the Chief Minister of Karnataka. The Supreme Court too had made several observations on that. I do not want to go into all those details.

SHRI K.H. MUNIYAPPA : That padayatra was undertaken to convince the people not to stage demonstrations and to avoid law and order situations.

SHRI H.D. DEVE GOWDA : A Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh wants to wage a war against Karnataka; a Chief Minister of Karnataka wants to go on a padayatra; a Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu sits on hunger strike and within eight days Shuklaji rushes to the spot in Tamil Nadu – we have seen all these dramas in the last 20-25 years. I do not hold brief for anybody. Please let me express my views.

Through this House, I would like to ask Shri Chandrababu Naidu as to what mistake we have committed. He was my colleague. We were together. There was no need to hurt his feelings. Let us come to the issue of Paragodu project. Are we encroaching upon others? No. Are we violating anything? No. … (Interruptions) I will prove it. I have got the documents to prove it. The hon. Minister is here. I must compliment his officers for taking a decision based purely on merits. I am not complimenting them because they have said that the project should continue and should not be stopped. It has been decided based purely on merits. In the beginning, the Ministry of Water Resources asked us to stop all the projects.

Sir, this Order is here with me. The Ministry of Water Resources had issued a direction to stop the project taking into account the 1892 Agreement. This is a letter dated 15th June, 2001 written to Shri S.J. Channabassappa, Irrigation Secretary which says:

"The issue has been considered by this Ministry in consultation with the Ministry of Law and Justice. As per Article 294 (b) of the Constitution of India read with Section 87 (1)(b) of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, agreements which were entered into between Mysore and Madras are still binding on the new States, that is, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu.

The Government of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh are advised to abide by the stipulation of the 1892 Agreement and the Agreement of 28th December, 1993 signed in continuation of the 1892 Agreement again by the States of Mysore and Madras, and take up new works strictly in conformity with the provisions of the Agreement so that the existing riparian rights in both States on common streams are not affected."

 

 This was the direction issued by the Ministry of Water Resources. Subsequently, I must compliment the Union government for taking steps to clear the Paragodu project. This is what my friend, Shri Jalappa had also said.

Now, I would like to read out extracts of the proceedings. I am not going to pat the officers. But they have taken a just decision. These are the minutes of the Inter-State Meeting convened on 15th October, 2001 at Hyderabad. The Chairperson of that meeting was Shri Jyothi, the Chief Engineer, representing the Central Water Commission. They had reviewed the entire thing. Shri N. Janardhana Reddy who is a former Chief Minister and one of the senior-most leaders is present here.

It says:

"…In the light of the above clarifications furnished by the Government of Karnataka and in view of the fact that drinking water needs have to be met on priority as per the National Water Policy, the Government of Andhra Pradesh may not object to this project."

 

 I would like to remind you, Yerrannaiduji that your officers were also present there in that meeting… (Interruptions)

Sir, I do not want to score any point here. Let me be very frank. These are the proceedings drawn under the chairmanship of an officer who was appointed by the Union Government. That is all I would like to say.

About this project, I would like to bring to the notice of this august House that even in the old agreement, it has been said.

The Chief Engineer, Hyderabad had also said:

"…Whereas the proposed tank project near Paragodu village was to the south of the Chellur-Bagepalli road and as such no consent of the Andhra Pradesh Government was necessary. "

 

 It was in the agreement itself. I can quote that. But I do not want to again take much of the time of the House.

Yerrannaiduji, we do not want to encroach even one drop of water which is allotted to Andhra Pradesh under the Bachawat Award. I would like to give this categorical assurance on behalf of the people of Karnataka. We are not the encroachers. We are not going to interfere with the Award given by Bachawat Tribunal. Let me be very plain on this issue.

But what are the issues that you have raised in your arguments? You have said about irrigation projects, Upper Tunga Basin project, Herrahally, etc. You have mentioned almost all the projects. But I would like to tell this august House and the whole country that Karnataka has never ever tried to encroach upon the rights of others. But for our rights, we will fight tooth and nail. We are not going to allow our rights to be encroached upon by any other neighbour. Being friendly or unfriendly is not the issue. People of Karnataka also have to live for their survival.

In the Irrigation Commission Report, headed by Shri Nijalingappa, it has been given that more than two-thirds of Krishna basin area has been suffering from chronic drought every year. When Late Shrimati Indira Gandhi was the Prime Minister, Irrigation Commission was constituted. It has given that Report. Please go through it. What I am narrating here in this august House is not a new thing.

Sir, let my friend Shri Yerrannaidu realise that there is not a single case when the hon. Minister for Water Resources has said that we have crossed 729 TMC - in any project whether it is Ghataprabha, whether it is Malaprabha, whether it is Tunga, whether it is Upper Tunga, Singtaluv L7C, Basvapur L9C whatever it may be – which the Bachawat Commission awarded under scheme A. For Bhadra and even Singtadu, we are now asked to take up the survey work. We have not taken up the project. All these projects were formulated within that 729 TMC.

The hon. Minister of Irrigation has never said that Karnataka has crossed 734 TMC. It is because we had given 5 TMC drinking water to Chennai city when Shri Devraj Urs was the Chief Minister.

Now, I am going to stand by my statement. There is nothing to hide. Sir, 734 TMC which is allotted under scheme A, if we have crossed that, I am prepared to accept that. Let the hon. Minister come up categorically. We have done nothing. We have designed our projects. We are implementing our projects within that 729 TMC of water that has been allocated by Bachawat under scheme A. About scheme B, I must say that it is our misfortune. At that time, I was in the Opposition. I know as to how we fought the battle. Unfortunately, the Union Government had not accepted scheme B. If the Government accepted scheme B, that issue would not have been raised now so vehemently by our friends coming from Andhra Pradesh. The Congress has to take that blame. I do not want to mix the matters. Under scheme B, out of 320 TMC of water, more than 160 TMC is our entitlement. Unfortunately, we are suffering. Even today, Shri Yerrannaidu, we have not used even after all these fights. There may be some storage. But unfortunately we have not used, and we have not completed the canal system, and the water is not going to the fields of the farmers. In fact, I have written a letter to the Chief Minister, and expedite the matter. It is because we cannot waste our water. Our farmers are dying. More than 300 farmers have committed suicide.

You know the position of Andhra Pradesh. I do agree. There is no question of any hesitation to accept the situation prevailing in Andhra Pradesh or in Karnataka or in Tamil Nadu. But there was a peculiar situation last year. More than 15 States were under severe drought. It is not happening every year. So far as Karnataka is concerned, we have been branded as we are not going to respect the law. We are not law-abiders. What does that mean? Out of ten years, only two years, that is in from 1995-1996, there were some problems about sharing of water.

I have high regards for Shri Mani Shankar Aiyar. So far as the interim award is concerned, in 2001-2002, 2002-2003, we have not done it purposely. The Interim Award was for 205. We do not know the reason why they have given the Interim Award.

SHRI A.P. JITHENDER REDDY : You are telling that 729 TMC of water or more than that you have not used. Will you just clarify that why under RDS scheme from Tungabhadra you have overused 5,900 acres of ayacut instead of 2,500 acres of ayacut?

MR. CHAIRMAN : Please take your seat.

SHRI H.D. DEVE GOWDA : What he says is that in Rajolibanda we are excessively using the water. But we have not crossed more than 320 TMC, what is being allocated to us. The water distribution is not monitored by our engineers. The Chairman of the TDB is an officer of the Central Government.

It is monitored by the Board. … (Interruptions)

SHRI A.P. JITHENDER REDDY : The Board is in Karnataka. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Shri Jithender Reddy, will you please take your seat?

… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : It is maintained by the Karnataka Government. … (Interruptions)

SHRI H.D. DEVE GOWDA : I am going to quietly sit till the Minister replies. We are entitled for 320 tmc ft. Let the Minister clarify whether we have gone beyond 320 tmc ft.

18.20 hrs. (Shri Basu Deb Acharia in the Chair) One more point is there. We are unable to have full storage because of silt. We are not able to have more than 290 tmc ft of water storage because of silt. Siltage was not cleared for the last 50 years and so, the storage in Tungabhadra Dam was reduced by 28-29 tmc ft. Where does that water go? It goes to Andhra Pradesh. We are not holding that water. … (Interruptions) I also have got some engineering knowledge. Nearly 28 tmc ft. of water which should have been actually stored in Tungabhadra has been reduced because of siltage.

I do not want to pick up a quarrel. I want to say only one word. The problem cannot be solved by using harsh words. It is being used by both the Chief Ministers. It is not proper. Both of them are doing their best to improve the economy of the States. I am not going to worry about the fight between the two. One is saying that he is waging a war and another says that he is going to equally fight. All these are not going to help us. As Shri Bangarappa suggested, they should sit together and collectively try to sort out the problems. We do not want to encroach upon the water of others. Let me be very plain. Let the hon. Minister say that we have crossed our limit by one inch, under any Project. Let him say that we have encroached upon the rights of Andhra Pradesh. We do not want to encroach upon others’ rights. Let the hon. Minister spell out whether we have done that or not. Let him also clarify whether the projects which have been planned by Karnataka are within the ambit of 729 tmc ft. or not. Let the hon. Minister say that. Even in Tungabhadra we have not done that. I would like to make this point very clear. The country must know that Karnataka is the worst sufferer. During all this period, with one-party rule or two-party rule or ten-party rule, we are the worst sufferers.

I must compliment the Prime Minister; he has given clearance for Paragodu Project. We have not done anything new; we have not done any harm; we have not encroached upon the rights of anybody else. It is the rights of Karnataka that we are trying to use to the best of our ability.

   

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR (MAYILADUTURAI): Mr. Chairman, Sir, in March 1998, on the eve of forming the National Democratic Alliance Government, a Common Minimum Programme was prepared by the parties to that alliance. In paragraph 5, they stated this and I quote:

"We will adopt a National Water Policy, which provides for effective and prompt settlement of disputes and their time-bound implementation."

 

 We are now five years beyond that pledge made to the country. The acrimony of this afternoon’s debate as well as the acrimony which attends every single discussion in this House on inter-State water disputes show the extent to which the National Democratic Alliance have fallen flat on their faces in implementing their promise to the people. What is even worse or what is even more insulting to the people of India is that the Common Minimum Programme of the NDA became their election manifesto in the 1999 elections. They have again returned to power in 1999 and no movement has been made in the direction of settling any inter-State water dispute, let alone its time-bound implementation.

THE MINISTER OF WATER RESOURCES (SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI): National Water Policy has been adopted by the Government. So far as the disputes are concerned, you know better than me! SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : I will be coming to that in a moment. I really look forward to answers from the hon. Union Minister of Water Resources because it is his responsibility under the Inter-State Water Disputes Act of 1956, to not allow disputes between States to fester, but to find out some kind of a solution.

Sir, I was saying that the National Water Policy, which they said they would adopt, would provide, they said, for the effective and prompt settlement of disputes. Five years on, which dispute has been settled? How effective have they been? How prompt have they been? They said that they would look through this policy towards a time-bound implementation of settlements. Which settlement has been implemented in any kind of a time-bound manner? Now they are saying that they do not have time to effect any settlement. They do not have it in them to ensure any time-bound implementation. They are going to solve all our problems by linking the Ganges to the Cauvery. I understand that that will take approximately 50 years and over the course of the next 50 years I do not know how many hundreds of thousands of crores of rupees we are going to spend to arrive at a settlement. By that time neither will the Union Minister of Water Resources be here, nor will I be here nor will anyone over here be here. If by time-bound settlement implementation you mean by the time qayamat comes, then there is some meaning to the NDA’s Common Minimum Programme. Otherwise, there is no meaning at all.

Sir, furthermore, I think, it was duplicitous -- I use the word with the utmost caution -- on the part of the NDA to say that they will adopt a National Water Policy without saying that there already existed a National Water Policy. It is a National Water Policy adopted in 1987 and a good 11 years after a National Water Policy that already existed, hiding completely the fact that there was already a National Water Policy, the NDA suddenly announced that they are going to have another National Water Policy.

SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI: It is in amended form.

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : No. It does not say that. I think, it is the duty of the Union Minister of Water Resources not only in his capacity as a Minister, but also as the Parliamentary Party Leader of a constituent member of the National Democratic Alliance, to know what he himself as a Minister, as a Party Member and as a Member of Parliament and also as a Leader of his Party in Parliament had said. They have not said that they will amend the National Water Policy.

THE MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF WATER RESOURCES (SHRIMATI BIJOYA CHAKRAVARTY): I think, the word `amended’ is written there.

   

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : I have the document here. Since you obviously do not read your own documents whereas I spend my time reading what you have written, I would be very happy to share this with you. You do not have to look to any other direction. If you just send a chaprasi across to me, I will pass this on to you.

SHRIMATI BIJOYA CHAKRAVARTY: If you read it thoroughly, then you will find it.

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : Madam, I will read every single word of it once again. Para I says, `We will adopt -- not amend -- a National Water Policy which provides for effective and prompt settlement of disputes and their time-bound implementation’. Please tell me where does the word `amend’ exist in your own NDA programme? Let us get beyond this argument.

Sir, I want to go to the fact that there was in 1987 a National Water Policy. I have taken the trouble to bring the document here with me to this House. But before I explain what is inside there, I would like to draw your attention to one aspect.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Shri Aiyar, you argue my case.

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : I am neither going to argue Shri Yerrannaidu’s case nor am I going to argue against it. This is not the State Assembly of Karnataka. This is not the State Assembly of Andhra Pradesh. This is the Parliament of India and in the dock is neither Chief Minister Shri Chandrababu Naidu nor Chief Minister Shri S. M. Krishna. In the dock is the Union Minister of Water Resources and his Prime Minister. So, I would not argue his case. I am going to fulfil the functions of Parliament. In doing so, I want to draw your attention to a few sentences from the two major speeches, one to the Irrigation Ministers of the country and the other to the National Water Convention itself, made by the late Rajiv Gandhi in 1986 and 1987 respectively.

It is to show how there is nothing new in the National Water Policy – 2002 or in this new ‘initiative’ of the Prime Minister. Whatever is new, is ill conceived and unimplemented.

In 1986, the then Prime Minister of India, Shri Rajiv Gandhi stated that there must be a very positive National Water Policy. He said:

"Emphasis must be on optimal utilisation with a positive attitude to sharing one’s resources without producing a shortage in those States which have the water."

 

 This wisdom was then transmuted into a draft National Water Policy and in commending the draft National Water Policy to the National Water Resources Council, the Prime Minister of the day, Shri Rajiv Gandhi said, "First and foremost we unanimously agree that water should be treated as a scarce and precious national resource. The planning, development and conservation of our water resource must be conducted on this premise and in this perspective."

He went on to say:

"The development of river basins need not always be directed only at the people living within that basin. Our rivers are bountiful and if properly harnessed, many of these rivers can meet adequately the requirements of the people living in the basin and still have something left over for others less fortunately placed. There is, therefore, scope for transferring water from one river basin to another with a view to meeting the requirements of water-short areas. This gives real content to the concept of water as a natural resource."

 

 But he fell short of endorsing the Ganga-Cauvery proposal which had been made by a Congress Minister several decades earlier. The reason why he hesitated in commending that entire project was not only the cost and the gestation period involved, but also the almost insuperable engineering problems and ecological dangers that were associated with the original K.L. Rao Plan. That is why the National Water Policy of 1987, instead of making unrealistic claims, limited itself to saying – I quote from Para 1.4. I am reading sentences in between, instead of reading the whole text.

"The planning and implementation of individual irrigation or multipurpose projects though done at the State level involve a number of aspects and issues. On these matters common approaches and guidelines are necessary. There are also complex problems of equity and social justice in regard to water distribution. All these questions need to be tackled on the basis of common policies and strategies."

 

 There was realism in this. There was a recognition of the national perspective and also a realisation that it is not through high rhetoric and grandiose projects in the air that problems of this kind would be solved. A completely practical approach was adopted towards this. One of the consequences of such a practical approach was that the upper riparian Karnataka, which had been insisting on settling the Cauvery dispute only through negotiations which had proved fruitless over the previous seventeen years, under a Congress Government - and I would like my friends from the DMK and the AIADMK to note this – in Karnataka the Chief Minister of which was none other than Shri S. Bangarappa who spoke here a few minutes ago, accepted a proposal which the previous non-Congress Government of Karnataka headed by Shri Ramkrishna Hegde had refused to accept; namely, the setting up of a tribunal.

And between the proposal for setting up a Tribunal and its actual constitution was a gap of, maybe, two months, whereas our present Union Minister for Water Resources is sitting over the Second Krishna Tribunal for eleven months and hiding himself behind some provision that within a year it will be done.

18.35 hrs. (Mr. Speaker in the Chair) SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI: It is not eleven years, it is eleven months.

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : I did not say that it is eleven years. I said eleven months. Please listen carefully. I was very careful to say eleven months. I also noted your response to one of our hon. Members query that you have twelve months to do it and so, there is nothing wrong in doing nothing for eleven months. This is the National Water Policy! SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI: The stipulation is there that the States concerned have to agree..… (Interruptions)

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : I am extremely amused that the Union Minister for Water Resources makes grand statements about what the States concerned will do without first checking with those States and then coming to a practical statement. The problem with the Union Ministry’s Water Policy all over the country is that it is full of bombast, it is not full of good sense. It lacks practicality and it indulges in grandiosity. It does not deal with the problems on the ground. In these circumstances, when I look at the National Water Policy, 2002 and compare it with the National Water Policy, 1987, I find that the Policy of 2002 is almost the same as the Policy of 1987 down to sub-headings. There is only one important sub-heading which is not to be found in the 1987 Policy and has been introduced in the 2002 Policy and it is the subject that precisely concerns us here. It is the sub-heading called "Water sharing/distribution among the States".

Now, where angels fear to tread, fools rush in. Shri Rajiv Gandhi knew in 1987 that there were so many complicated problems relating to the question of water sharing and distribution among the States that he left it at the practical point of common approaches and strategies, one consequence of which was the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal. But these people, in their anxiety to somehow befool the people of India into believing that they have moved forward, added a new section. Congratulations on adding a new Section! They must, after all, make a contribution. What does that Section say?

SHRI A.P. JITHENDER REDDY : I would like to say something on this point..… (Interruptions)

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : No, you have your say when your turn comes. Sir, I seek your protection.

There are two paragraphs that have been added consisting of only four sentences. So, you will permit me to read them and specifically ask the Minister as to what he has done about these four sentences in two sections over the last year-and-a half that we had this Policy before us. Incidentally, they were supposed to formulate this National Water Policy in the year 2000. It took them another two years to formulate it. But that is not my problem. It says:

"Water sharing/distribution among the States should be guided by a national perspective with due regard to water resources availabilities and needs within the river basins. Necessary guidelines, including for water short States even outside the basin, need to be evolved for facilitating future agreement among the basin States."

 

 What I would like to know is whether one guideline, two guidelines or three guidelines that the Union Minister for Water Resources has evolved consequent upon this National Water Policy, circulated among the States has secured even a measure of agreement among the States, let alone their time-bound implementation.

Is this not an illegitimate use of words to befool people, to pull the wool over their eyes, to make them think that something is happening when in fact nothing is happening?

I move to the next sentence. That is the last sentence which I will be reading from this section. It says:

"The Inter-State Water Disputes Act of 1956 may be suitably reviewed and amended for timely adjudication of water disputes referred to the Tribunal. "

 

 Where is the amendment?

SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI: It has been done.

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : In what sense? Have you amended it?

SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI: Yes. We have amended it.

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR: He says that they have done it and they have amended it. He has amended it as best as it suits him.

The point is that if it has been amended for the purpose mentioned here, which is ‘timely adjudication of water disputes’, can you please tell me why the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal which can give an Interim Award within thirteen months of its constitution – it was constituted in March, 1990 and it gave its Interim Award in June 1991 – took thirteen years since then before the final Award of the Tribunal is before us?

SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI: This particular Act has been amended. It has no provision to give retrospective effect. … (Interruptions)

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : Mr. Speaker, Sir, would you please ask Shri Dhananjaya Kumar to sit down? … (Interruptions) He is like a popping jack. … (Interruptions) He is jumping up and down. … (Interruptions)

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR: Congress was ruling this country for the last 45 years. … (Interruptions) Shri Mani Shankar Aiyar, you cannot forget that Congress ruled this country continuously for 45 years? … (Interruptions)

SHRI MANI SHANKAR KUMAR : You cannot speak unless I yield.… (Interruptions)

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : You have committed so many sins. Now, we are repenting for that. … (Interruptions) Just in five years you want the NDA Government to solve all the problems. … (Interruptions) What have you done in 45 years? … (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: Please sit down. I would request the Minister also not to intervene.

… (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: You can speak only when your turn comes.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : Shri Yerrannaidu is making his 27th intervention. … (Interruptions) I have not yielded. … (Interruptions) Shri Yerrannaidu is totally disrupting the proceedings. … (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: Shri Yerrannaidu, any Member can intervene provided there is a point of order.

… (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: You can give your reply at the end of the debate, not now.

… (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: Shri Dhananjaya Kumar, I want to conclude the debate today. It is a very important issue.

… (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: Shri Mani Shankar Aiyar made a very important point. Let him make his point.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : If there is a discussion on National Water Policy, we will all participate. … (Interruptions) But this discussion pertains to Krishna water basin and sharing of inter-state river water between the States of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka. … (Interruptions)

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : Mr. Speaker, Sir, you tell me whether I am out of order. … (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: No. … (Interruptions)

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : Mr. Speaker, Sir, I beg your protection. … (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: Yes, you go ahead. Shri Aiyar, how much time will you take?

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : If I were permitted to speak, I would have concluded by now.

MR. SPEAKER: How much time will you take?

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : I will take only a few minutes, if I am permitted those few minutes. … (Interruptions) Since their arguments are being demolished, both the NDA and their supporters, are trying to interrupt this process. … (Interruptions) I do not think that truth can be hidden. Satyameva Jayate. … (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: What is wrong in saying Satyameva Jayate?

… (Interruptions)

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : Mr. Speaker, Sir, I cannot continue with this caterwauling. … (Interruptions) Let there be some discipline in the House. … (Interruptions) I have listened to this ...*** from Shri Yerrannaidu for fifty minutes. … (Interruptions) Let him listen to my speech. … (Interruptions) It was ...*** … (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: I will expunge that word from the record. Shri Aiyar, go ahead.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Shri Mani Shankar Aiyar came to Andhra Pradesh. He was talking *** . … (Interruptions) Everywhere he was talking *** . … (Interruptions)

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : This is the type of word he has used. What is this?… (Interruptions)

           

***Expunged as ordered by the Chair                 SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU (: He should withdraw it. If anything said by any Parliamentarian is termed *** , is he not talking *** ? Does it not mean that?… (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: My protection is there to you. Please sit down.

… (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: We must respect every Member whosoever speaks. Please sit down.

… (Interruptions)

DR. MANDA JAGANNATH : Every Member has a right to air his views. So, Shri Aiyar cannot say that it is *** . He should withdraw it.… (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: I have already removed that word from the record. There is nothing else on the record. Please sit down.

… (Interruptions)

DR. MANDA JAGANNATH : He has to apologise. He cannot say that it is *** . How can he say it? It is unparliamentary.… (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: Let us complete the debate.

DR. MANDA JAGANNATH : It shows his highhandedness. He should apologise for that.… (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: Let there be a very decent debate in the House. Let us try to avoid making allegations against each other. This is an important issue. I am sure, the people must be looking for a greater supply of water to them. They are not interested in anything else than getting water. There may be some difficulty with Karnataka. They are also having scarcity of water. Please sit down.

… (Interruptions)

***Expunged as ordered by the Chair MR. SPEAKER: By fighting among yourselves, you will not be serving the cause for which you are fighting. I have requested him to conclude. He will conclude his speech within the next five minutes.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Sir, do you agree with him when he uses that word?

MR. SPEAKER: Not at all. I have already expunged that word from the record.

Shri Mani Shankar Aiyar, please continue and complete.

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : Sir, if you can get Shri Dhananjaya Kumar sit down, I will continue my speech. … (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: You can complete it now. Hon. Members, let him complete it now. Please sit down now. I have already given my ruling on the issue.

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : Mr. Speaker, Sir, the concluding paragraph of the National Water Policy of the year 2002 says:

"The success of the National Water Policy will depend entirely on evolving and maintaining a national consensus. "

 

 I want to know one thing from the hon. Minister of Water Resources. What steps have been taken in the last 15 months since this National Water Policy was adopted to evolve a national consensus? Or, what steps were taken to reinforce, as the National Water Policy says, the commitment? It talks of the commitment to this underlying principles and objectives. We see from the acrimony of this afternoon one thing. What happens is that whenever the Cauvery issue is raised here, there is no move at all towards securing a national consensus. Indeed, even the member-States of a basin – in this the particular case that I have in mind is the Cauvery River Authority - are not even convened to get together in the Authority to find solutions at the time of acute crisis. Moreover, the Policy further says:

"In order to achieve the desired objectives, the State Water Policy backed with an operational action plan shall be formulated in a time-bound manner, say, in two years. "

 

 I am reading from the National Water Policy. Today, we are 15 to 16 months down the road from the adoption of the National Water Policy. There are only a few months left for the State Water Policies backed by action plans to be formulated. In order to reinforce the National Water Policy to be formulated, even a beginning of this has not been made, as is clear from all the arguments that we have heard. Sir, when one looks across the world, as for example, the Danube River, and when one sees that the Danube river crosses Germany etc., what do we come to know?… (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: He has not said anything for which you should get agitated. He has said nothing objectionable. Please sit down.

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : Sir, when we look across the world, there are several States which are approximately the size of our States of the Indian Union. We find that a single river system, that is, the Danube river passes through Germany, Austria, The Czech Republic, The Slovak Republic, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia and Montenegro, Bulgaria, Romania, Russia, it passes through all these countries and they have been able to sort out and settle what should be the basis of water sharing among them. We have the Helsinki principles which enable even sovereign States, which are lower or upper riparian, to resolve issues among themselves. It does seem to me to be a grave failure on the part of the Union Government as reflected in the specific set of disputes that has been brought before the House this afternoon which are only illustrative and not comprehensive in nature. To recognise that the National Water Policy should not be treated as a piece of paper, we need to have active progress on specific elements, that this involves co-operation among the States and not the politicisation of inter-State disputes into party political matters aimed entirely at securing electoral advantage for one party or the other. This Government’s life is going to end because they are about to indulge in the act of political suicide of dissolving this Lok Sabha. We will shrotly have a Congress Government in Andhra Pradesh, a Congress Government in Karnataka and a Congress Government here in the Centre and that will constructively solve the problems of this country instead of this hypocrisy of having the TDP support a Government which has done nothing to resolve the problems of the farmers of Andhra Pradesh.

SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM : The problem will not be solved. The problem will increase. This is all created by you. … (Interruptions)

SHRI KHARABELA SWAIN (BALASORE): So, it is only the people of India who kicked Rajiv Gandhi out of power. … (Interruptions)

DR. C. KRISHNAN (POLLACHI): Mr. Chairman, I thank you very much for giving me this opportunity to speak on this issue. I am speaking on behalf of Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam headed by Thiru. Vaiko, Member of Parliament, who is still in prison for more than one year under the POTA. Cauvery water being a issue again for Tamil Nadu, I want to make some general statements even though the dispute is between Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka. We have the common issue of sharing water with Karnataka. Tamil Nadu is also dependent upon Cauvery water for years together. For thousands of years, we have been using Cauvery water. We have our birth right and our standing right over the usage of Cauvery water. Cauvery water has been used for thousands of years by our ancestors. The following districts of Tamil Nadu – Salem, Namakkal, Thiruchirapalli, Karur, Erode, Thanjavur, Nagapattinam, Karaikal and Union Territory of Pondicherry depend on Cauvery water for cultivation and drinking purposes. In view of the present situation, we have an acute drinking water problem.

The Government of Karnataka should honour the Interim Award given by the Cauvery Water Dispute Tribunal and immediately release 205 TMC ft. of water to Tamil Nadu.

MR. SPEAKER: Dr. Krishnan, would you like to lay your speech on the Table of the House?

DR. C. KRISHNAN : Sir, I would like to make some general statements pertaining to certain specific issues.

The problem of inter-State water disputes can be solved only by inter-linking of overflowing rivers of the North with that of the water-needed areas of the South and other places in India. The Central Government should have the overall right by nationalisation of all the rivers of India and distribute river water according to a pre-determined formula. This is most needed for national integration as well as to develop India as a rich country in future through agricultural processes.

Sir, the Government of Karnataka is building a dam across the river Cauvery on Chitravathi river at Paragodu and also in three other places against the interests of the people of Andhra Pradesh. Likewise, the Government of Kerala has also started constructing a Check Dam on the river Bhavani at Mukkali in Palakkad District.

PROF. A.K. PREMAJAM (BADAGARA): Mr. Speaker, Sir, the discussion today is about sharing of water between Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. Where does Kerala come in here? … (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: Everybody in this House can quote instances of foreign countries also. You can speak about countries right from Croatia to New Zealand. If he is speaking about Kerala, what is wrong in it?

DR. V. SAROJA : Mr. Speaker, Sir, many hon. Members have deviated from the subject. So, he has every right to speak whatever he wants. … (Interruptions)

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : Mr. Speaker, Sir, he can speak about the entire world. … (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER: But sometimes he must take the word river Cauvery also.

DR. C. KRISHNAN : Sir, even though the river Bhavani originates from the Nilgiris in Tamil Nadu, it enters into Kerala but turns back to Tamil Nadu. Such recent constructions both in Karnataka and Kerala should be monitored and the interests of the people who have been using the river water since long should be protected.

Sir, by inter-linking all the rivers in India, the surface of water can be used for transportation of men and materials. It will give a lot of employment opportunities to the people. The flow of water can be used for generation of electricity. Apart from this, water will be useful for agricultural and drinking purposes. By judicious utilisation of water, we can increase foodgrains production and augment the per capita income of the common people of our country.

Sir, finally, on the issue of sharing of water between Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, we support the views expressed by the Leader of the TDP, Shri Yerrannaidu.

अध्यक्ष महोदय : अब क्या कावेरी बिहार में जाएगी?

डॉ. रघुवंश प्रसाद सिंह :अध्यक्ष महोदय, मैं देख रहा हूं कि कर्नाटक और आंध्रा प्रदेश के बीच में पानी की लड़ाई है।…( व्यवधान)

श्री डेन्जिल बी. एटकिन्सन (नामनिर्दिष्ट): बिहार बीच में कहां से आ गया?

डॉ. रघुवंश प्रसाद सिंह :बिहार पंचायत और न्याय करने के लिए आ रहा है।

अध्यक्ष महोदय, पृथ्वी पर दो-तिहाई पानी है और एक-तिहाई जमीन है, लेकिन जो पानी की मात्रा है उसमें ९७ फीसदी पानी खराब जल एवं नमकीन है और तीन प्रतिशत मीठा पानी है, जिसका उपयोग किया जा सकता है। इसलिए किसी ने कहा है कि तीसरा विश्व युद्ध पानी के लिए होगा, अभी तेल के लिए जहां-तहां लड़ाई छिड़ी हुई है। तेल की लड़ाई समझ में आती है, लेकिन पानी की लड़ाई भी बहुत जबरदस्त होने वाली है। विशेषज्ञ बताते हैं कि दुनियाभर में तीसरा विश्व युद्ध पानी के लिए होगा। हमारे यहां लोग कविता में कहते हैं - "रहिमन पानी राखिए, बिन पानी सब सून, पानी गए न ऊबरे, मोती मानुस चून,"यानी मोती में भी पानी नहीं है तो उसका कोई मतलब नहीं है। मतलब मनुष्य मे अगर पानी,इज्जत, प्रतिष्ठा नहीं है तो मनुष्य में कुछ नहीं है। उसी तरह से चूना है। चूने में यदि पानी न रहे तो वह सूख जाएगा और तब वह किसी काम का नहीं रहेगा। उसी तरह वाज़िब बात है, कर्नाटक और आंध्रा प्रदेश के माननीय सदस्यों में अक्रास पार्टी लाईन, दोनों राज्यों के बीच में जल विवाद है।

19.00 hrs. भारत के संविधान के आर्टीकल २६२ में अन्तर्राज्यीय जल विवाद के लिए प्रावधान है। उसी के अनुसार अन्तर्राज्यीय जल विवाद अधनियम, १९५६ बना। उसमें कहा गया है कि दो राज्यों के बीच में जब जल विवाद होगा, पानी के बंटवारे के लिए, नदी के पानी के हिस्सेदारी के लिए लड़ाई होगी तो उसके लिए पिटीशन पड़ेगी और एक साल के बाद न्यायाधिकरण बनेगा। अगर एक साल के बाद प्राधिकरण बनेगा, तब तक लड़ाई बहुत बढ़ जायेगी। अच्छा हुआ कि इसमें सुधार हो गया। पहले इसमें तीन साल का प्रोवीजन था, इससे विवाद और झगड़े बढ़ते चले जा रहे हैं, लेकिन उसका प्रावधान नहीं है। इस झगड़े की जड़ में भारत सरकार क्या कर रही है? भारत सरकार की जिम्मेदारी बनती है कि दो राज्यों के बीच में, तीन राज्यों के बीच में अगर झगड़ा है तो यह राष्ट्रीय समस्या होगी। एक तरफ पंजाब, हरियाणा और दिल्ली के बीच में यमुना के पानी की लड़ाई है, उधर राजस्थान से रावी और व्यास के पानी की लड़ाई है। हमारे यहां उत्तर प्रदेश, मध्य प्रदेश, झारखण्ड और बिहार के बीच में सोन नदी के पानी को लेकर लड़ाई है। इस तरह से यह सब चलता है।

सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने निदेश दिया कि सभी नदियों को जोड़ दिया जाये, लिंक कर दिया जाये। रीवर्स को इण्टरलिंक करने का बड़ा भारी प्रोजैक्ट है, उस पर ५.६५ लाख करोड़ रुपया खर्च होगा, ऐसा लोग बताते हैं। डॉ. के.एल. राव ने भी सोचा था कि नदियों को जोड़ दिया जाये। कर्नाटक में हाल ही में मैं गया था। मैंने देखा कि बरसात के दिनों में वहां सूखा है। हमारे यहां आदमी बाढ़ से तबाही है और देश के वभिन्न हिस्सों में पानी से तबाह है। आन्ध्रा प्रदेश में भी, हैदराबाद में भी पीने के पानी का संकट लोग बता रहे थे। लेकिन हम लोग वहां गये तो हैदराबाद में वर्षा हुई। चूंकि यह संवेदनशील मामला है और हमने सभी पक्षों को सुना है, इसलिए हम निष्पक्ष रूप से बोलना चाहते हैं और न्याय की बात कहना चाहते हैं कि इसमें न्याय होना चाहिए, क्योंकि पानी के बिना जिंदगी नहीं चलेगी, न कुछ उत्पादन होगा, न जिंदगी रहेगी। जल ही जीवन है और जल के रुाोत सीमित हैं, इसलिए अब ये इंटरलकिंग ऑफ रीवर्स के लिए चले हैं, नदियों को जोड़ने के लिए चले हैं। ये नदियों के २-३ बेसिन की लड़ाई को हल नहीं करा पाएंगे तो देश भर की नदियों को जोड़ना चाहते हैं तो यह कैसे सम्भव हो सकेगा। हम किस आधार पर यह विश्वास करें कि आप इतना भारी प्रोजैक्ट को कम्पलीमेंट कर सकते हैं। आप दो राज्यों के बीच का मामला नहीं सुलझा सकते, तुंगभद्रा, अपर तुंगा और परागोटू का मामला नहीं सुलझा सकते। परागोटू में कर्नाटक का दावा है कि पीने के पानी का प्रोजैक्ट है, लेकिन ये लोग कहते हैं कि नहीं, डिं्रकिंग वाटर का ही नहीं है तो सी.डब्लू.सी. इसका क्या करेगा?वह यहां इसलिए है कि कोई भी राज्य की परियोजना बनेगी तो सी.डब्लू.सी. उसे मंजूर करेगा। हर राज्य के हित का संरक्षण करेगा। हाल ही में सुना है कि जून में दोनों राज्यों के बीच में विवाद हुआ तो २७ जून को बैठक हुई। दोनों राज्यों के अधिकारी आये थे, उनकी बैठक हुई थी। माननीय मंत्री जी, आपने कई बार बैठक की, दोनों राज्यों के मुख्यमंत्रियों और सिंचाई मंत्रियों को बुलाकर दोनों को बिठाकर अगर राय नहीं करेंगे, विचार-विमर्श नहीं करेंगे तो कैसे होगा? क्योंकि दोनों का रीपेरियन राइट है। अन्तर्राष्ट्रीय नदियों के बीच में राइपेरियन राइट होता है, उसके लिए इंटरनेशनल लॉ बना हुआ है, उसी तरह से राज्यों के बीच में केन्द्रीय सरकार की जिम्मेदारी बनती है कि उसे देखकर, बात करके सुलझाये।

संविधान के आर्टीकल २६२ के क्लाज दो में एक और बड़ा खराब क्लाज हमें लगता है। उसमें कहा गया है कि यह सुप्रीम कोर्ट और कोर्ट के जूरिस्डिक्शन के बाहर रहेगा। अगर कोई भी विवाद होता है तो लोग न्याय के लिए कोर्ट में जाते हैं, लेकिन आर्टीकल २६२ के क्लाज दो में लिखा है कि सुप्रीम कोर्ट का उसमें कोई जुरिस्डिक्शन नहीं होगा और इसके लिए एक अलग न्यायाधिकरण बनाना पड़ेगा।

अबअलग न्यायाधीकरण क्यों नहीं बन रहा ? इससे दोनों राज्यों का मसला हल हो जायेगा। हमारा कहना है कि दोनों राज्य देश के अंग हैं। यदि राज्य-राज्य के बीच पानी की लड़ाई होगी तो इससे बड़ा भारी संकट पैदा हो जायेगा। केन्द्रीय सरकार को इसके लिए प्रयत्न करना चाहिए जिससे दोनों राज्यों के हितों का संरक्षण हो।

अध्य्क्ष महोदय, पीने के पानी के बगैर लोग रह नहीं सकते। सिंचाई के बिना भी हमारा उत्पादन नहीं हो सकता। इसलिए दोनों राज्यों या जहां कहीं भी राज्यों के बीच जल का विवाद हो, उसे सर्वोच्च प्राथमिकता देकर, आपस में बैठक कराकर, उसका हल निकालना चाहिए। हरेक राज्य के हितों का संरक्षण होना चाहिए। हम कैसे कहेंगे कि किसी राज्य को सूखा छोड़ दें या किसी राज्य को पीने का पानी नहीं दिया जाये? हमारा कहना है कि सभी की राय से इसका हल निकालना चाहिए। यह देश का सवाल है। इस तरह देश के हरेक राज्य के बीच विवाद उठ खड़ा हो जायेगा।

माननीय मंत्री जी बतायें कि कब इस समस्या का समाधान होगा या कब न्यायाधीकरण बनकर काम करेगा ? सी.डब्ल्यू.सी. क्यों इस विवाद को आगे बढ़ा रहा है ? मुझे लगता है कि भारत सरकार को इंटरैस्ट है कि सब राज्यों का आपस में झगड़ा रहे। इससे उसे मजा आता है। दो-तीन राज्यों के बीच जो जल विवाद है या अन्य कोई विवाद है, उसे हल करने का काम प्रधान मंत्री को करना चाहिए क्योंकि यह उनकी जिम्मेदारी बनती है। जिन राज्यों के बीच विवाद है, वे उन राज्यों के मुख्यमंत्रियों को बुलाकर बातचीत करें। उसमें तकनीकी लोग भी रहने चाहिए। …( व्यवधान)इसलिए हमें लगा कि किसी राज्य का पक्ष न लेकर न्याय की बात करनी चाहिए। इसमें भारत सरकार की जिम्मेदारी बनती है कि वह आगे आये और बताये कि किस तरह से यह विवाद हल होगा, कैसे इसका समाधान होगा ? हम वचावत आयोग आदि कई आयोगों का नाम सुन रहे हैं। इनसे यह विवाद घट नहीं रहा, बल्कि बढ़ रहा है। हमने इस बहस में एक से एक सवाल उठते हुए देखे हैं। उत्तर प्रदेश और बिहार के बीच में भी शिवपुरी-इन्द्रपुरी जलाशय को लेकर विवाद होने वाला है। मंत्री जी ने आपको बैठक बुलाने के लिए चिट्ठी लिखी है। आपने कहा था कि किसी स्टेट से कोई खबर नहीं है। मंत्री जी ने हमें कापी भेज दी है। मेरा कहना है कि आप उनकी बैठक बुला लें। हरेक राज्य के हित को देखते हुए भारत सरकार को पंच वाला काम करते हुए निष्पक्ष निर्णय लेना चाहिए।

अध्यक्ष महोदय : जब तक चर्चा पूरी नहीं होती तब तक के लिए मैं सदन का समय बढ़ा रहा हूं। मंत्री जी का उत्तर भी आज ही होगा। मुझे सब सदस्यों से विनती करनी है कि वे सब पांच-पांच मिनट में अपनी बात कहें क्योंकि पार्टी के बड़े नेताओं का भाषण पहले ही हो चुका है।

SHRI K.H. MUNIYAPPA (KOLAR): Thank you Mr. Speaker Sir. The States of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka are facing the problem of water because this issue is over vigorous and there is no rainfall for the last three years. There are about 15 States which are facing the same problem. The upper riparian States, particularly in the South of India, are facing this problem for the last three years.

If there is no rainfall, how can we give water to lower riparian States? If there is water, then it is the bounden duty of the upper riparian States to give water to the lower riparian States. We are not here to politicise the issues.

19.10 hrs. (Dr. Raghuvansh Prasad Singh in the Chair) Sir, we do not want to take any political mileage out of it. This is a very important issue to be solved by the Government of India.

We have mentioned this issue so many times. The most important thing is that the Government of India has to come forward to settle the issues. The lower riparian States should understand that the distress should be shared properly. They should understand the realities whether there is water or not. As our colleagues Shri S. Bangarappa and Shri R.L. Jalappa as well as Shrimati Margaret Alva rightly pointed out the Krishna Water dispute… (Interruptions)

SHRI S.S. PALANIMANICKAM : At present how much water you have? How much water you have released to Tamil Nadu? 53 TMC water now you are having. You have released water in Kabini and Krishnaraja Sagar for irrigation but you have not released even a drop of water for the distress areas of Tamil Nadu.

SHRI K.H. MUNIYAPPA : Shri Palanimanickam, you do not worry. Rain is in progress. Water will come to Tamil Nadu.… (Interruptions)

Now, Sir, Paragodu issue is related to my district. It is in Shri R.L. Jalappa’s constituency. I belong to the same district. That is the most important thing where my colleagues, Andhra Pradesh people, should understand the ground reality as to how much water is there, how to deal with Paragodu issue. This is a very important thing.

Water utilisation is 0.9 TMC by Karnataka in Chitravati (including Paragodu Project). Karnataka’s share in the Chitravati is not less than 2 TMC out of the available water in Chitravati basin. The drinking water supply has the highest priority among the users of water as observed in the National Water Policy and judgement of the Supreme Court in Delhi Municipal Supply Case. (1996) 2 SCC 572). The Agreements of 1892 and 1933 were terminated by the provisions of Sec. 7 (i) of the Indian Independence Act, 1947. I think, Shri Yerrannaidu is always mentioning about agreements of 1892 and 1933.… (Interruptions) That is why I appeal to the hon. Minister for Water Resources and I will be thankful to the hon. Minister for Water Resources and Central Water Commission if a small Project of 0.137 TMC is cleared by the Central Water Commission for drinking water purposes, the details of which have been explained by Shri R.L. Jalappa. So I do not want to go into the details. These types of projects in Andhra Pradesh, in Tamil Nadu, in Kerala, wherever it is needed, it is the bounden duty of the respective State to take care of these Projects. It is an obligation of the States to give drinking water.… (Interruptions) If in Anantapur there is no water, it is the duty of the State as to how to get the water. Same is the case with Kolar also.

DR. S. VENUGOPAL : Are you objecting?

SHRI K.H. MUNIYAPPA : We are not objecting. You do not know the reality. You are taking the political mileage out of it. You cannot get the political mileage out of it. The delay in diversion of Godavari is for the last 25 years. Our share in it is 23 TMC. We could not get it because Godavari Project has not been completed. This is the injustice done for Karnataka. We are not getting water from Godavari River. This water has to come to Karnataka. There are so many issues related to upper riparian States. There is always a problem. Even there is no water; even there is a heavy water. Nobody will stop the water and it will go to the lower riparian. You know it very well. If there is water, there will be a problem for the lower riparian States. Its position is like that of State of Colorado in the United States of America where Colorado is an upper riparian and has running water disputes with Kansas, Wyoming and Nebraska, etc. in respect of Arkansas, North Platte and Colorado.

This is clearly mentioned. This is not in India. Wherever you see, the upper riparian people are always facing the problem. They could not control it. If they want to take their legitimate share to which they deserve, the lower riparian people are trying to cry, they agitate and create troubles and they do not allow the upper riparian people to use their entitled water properly. This is the fate of the upper riparian people. This is the position. I do not want to go into depth of all these things.

I am appealing to the Prime Minister and the Water Resources Minister that by debating and by criticising each other on these issues will not solve the problem. It can be solved only through an amicable settlement. Even the national issues of water dispute are left to the decision of the Supreme Court; and the international disputes of water are left to the decision of the international Court. The Supreme Court is there. This has to be solved only through a dialogue amicably. Let the Chief Ministers of Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu sit with the Prime Minister and the Water Resources Minister and try to solve this problem amicably. Let them find out how much water is available and work out the ratio in which it can be shared by them.

Harshly speaking or criticising each other will not serve the puprose. Please understand that you cannot provoke the people. Particularly I appeal to my Andhra Pradesh friends, "Do not provoke. Do not take political advantage of it." It will not be good for you. This is for me also. … (Interruptions) Shri Venugopal, I am not telling to you but I am telling to myself. No purpose will be served by this. If you want to get the water, you sit together with the Central Water Commission, with the Prime Minister and the Water Resources Minister and solve the problem. Do not provoke the people. It will not help you and me. We are not provoking each other. You are trying to provoke the people. Do not provoke the people. This is my appeal. I once again request and urge upon the Prime Minister and the Water Resources Minister to solve this problem.

Lastly, I mention that we are all in the neighbouring States. Shri Srinivasalu and Shri Parthasarathi, Shri Jalappa and myself are all friends. We are not ready to provoke the people. That will not help us. There is a Central Government. There we have to fight. We have to solve the problem and we have to get the legitimate share of water. We do not come in your way of getting the share of water to which you are entitled to.

Without water available here, my friends from Tamil Nadu are asking for release of water. There is no water in Cauvery and you are asking for release of water. You understand these things. I have an appeal to the hon. Minister. These people have alleged about the illegal projects constructed in Karantaka. I will ask you to send a team to see whether we have used more than 729 tmc of water, which has been given by the Bachawat Award. We are law-abiding people. We have not gone beyond that. We abide by the decision of the Central Water Commission. Here, my friends are unnecessarily agitating. Please understand that.

       

DR. MANDA JAGANNATH (NAGAR KURNOOL): Respected Chairperson, Sir, thank you very much for giving me this opportunity. As many of my colleagues have stated, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh are neighbouring States with very good relations, culturally and socially alike, for the past so many years. The river Krishna has Thungabhadra river as tributary. The river Thungabhadra has Bhadra and Thunga as its tributaries. These rivers and the river Pennar pass through both of these States. Historically, the two States were under the Nizam. When the States were divided on linguistic basis, some of the districts had gone to Karnataka and some others had come to Andhra Pradesh. The rivers Krishna and Thungabhadra, as I said earlier, pass through both the States.

In recent past, though we had very good relations for the past thousands of years, the actions of the upper riparian State of Karnataka have created an alarming situation in the lower riparian State of Andhra Pradesh. The commissions and omissions of the upper riparian State are definitely going to affect the lower riparian State. As our hon. Member Shri K.H. Muniyappa said, the upper riparian State will always have problems but because of those problems they should not encroach upon the rights of the lower riparian States.

When we come to water distribution, as many hon. Members said, under the KWDT, the Krishna Water Dispute Tribunals Award was given in 1976, awarding Maharashtra 560 tmc ft, Karnataka 700 tmc ft and Andhra Pradesh 800 tmc ft. with a provision of additional use of reserve water of the quantity which they have calculated as per the formula arrived by the Bachawat Commission in clause 5 (b). The formula is ten per cent of the average water utilised during 1992-93, that is, 176.5 tmc ft., which was utilised in 1968-69 under clause 5 (b).

Every State is a riparian State – Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh – and the Award has been given by the Tribunal. Our colleagues from Karnataka always say that they are law abiding and very silent people who take care of their neighbours. It is so why has this situation come now? If they are law abiding and very silent people, why are people agitating in the lower riparian State? This is a point to be noted. It is because of the unilateral action of the State of Karnataka, which my colleagues have earlier mentioned, violating all the agreements and all the Awards, whether they are inter-State or national, that such a situation has been created.

I would just quote here an example about the Thungabhadra sub-basins. The share of Karnataka in the award from the Thungabhadra sub-basins was 295 tmc ft plus 7.5 per cent of the regenerated water calculated to 10.86 tmc ft., which comes to a total of 305.86 tmc ft. As per the figures provided by the Government of Karnataka on the utilisation submitted to the Supreme Court, in 1981 itself, Karnataka had utilised 319.55 tmc ft. of Thungabhadra sub-basin water exceeding the allowed utilisation for Karnataka. It is still continuing. Now, above the Thungabhadra, the Upper Thunga project is conceived. As far as our knowledge goes, it seems 12 tmc ft water is needed for this. Having consumed the entire quantity of allocation, they say, 320 tmc ft. is allowed for them.

It is all right. I agree. As per the Award, it is 305.86 TMC ft., but they say it is 320 TMC ft. It is all right for a while. They consumed 319.55 TMC ft. of water that is nearly 320 TMC ft. of water. So, where from the 12 TMC ft. of water will come for upper Thunga project? It is because of drought and because of silting that the water in Thungabhadra got reduced. This is what is worrying us because under the guise of not having the water, if the upper riparian States withhold water, then what will be the plight of the lower riparian States?

Now, I come to Rajolibanda Diversion Scheme. It is an inter-state project situated across Thungabhadra river on the border of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. The right flank is in Kurnool district is the left flank is in the Raichur district of Karnataka. A canal is dug. The canal runs for 143 kilometres from the left flank of RDS with 43 kilometres in Karnataka, in the Raichur district, and remaining 100 kilometres stretch in Andhra Pradesh. The water allocated for this is 17.10 TMC ft., which is divided, that is, 10 TMC ft. for the river and 7.10 TMC ft. from the Thungabhadra dam itself.

Now, in the Rajolibanda Diversion Scheme, the water allocated for Karnataka is 43 kilometres in the Raichur district is 1.20 TMC ft. of water to irrigate about 5,879 acres. For Andhra Pradesh 15.90 TMC ft. of water was allocated to irrigate 87,500 acres in Gadwal and Alampur, erstwhile talukas of Mahboobnagar district. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Please conclude.

… (Interruptions)

DR. MANDA JAGANNATH : Sir, I need three or four minutes. It is a very important issue. It is a very relevant matter also. … (Interruptions) Gadwal and Alampur are erstwhile talukas of Mahboobnagar. Often you will be seeing in Television and in the newspapers that Mahboobnagar district is a perennial drought-hit district. There is hunger, there is no water for irrigation and there is no transport facility. So, a lot of problems are there. There is one peculiar thing. Both Krishna river and Thungbhadra river pass through Mahboobnagar district, but without any water to Mahaboobnagar.

Now, what is happening for RDS is that instead of 5,879 acres within a stretch of 43 kilometres, the Karnataka is drawing 6 to 8 TMC ft. of water irregularly irrigating nearly 22,000 acres, instead of 5,879 acres thereby reducing the inflow has come down. So, Andhra Pradesh, which has to irrigate 87,500 acres, is able to irrigate 30,000 acres only in Mahboobnagar district.

Apart from these, about 1,120 pump sets are installed in 32 villages on either side of the river along the banks of Thungabhadra between T.B. Dam and RDS. It is irrigating 46,500 acres consuming about 6 to 8 TMC ft. of water. So, put together it is nearly 12 to 15 TMC ft. of water. They are drawing illegally. It is a fact. … (Interruptions)

Sir, I respect hon. Deve Gowda very much, the former Prime Minister of India. I would like to put a straight forward question to him. He said, `show a single instance of violation of the Bachawat Award’. …(Interruptions) He has put forward. … (Interruptions) You prove it that you are not utilising this much. … (Interruptions)

It was confirmed many times. … (Interruptions) In spite of our repeated complaints and requests it was not stopped drawing of excess water illegally. Our hon. Chief Minister has written a letter and requested and made a phone call also. But, they have not yielded and the repairs have not taken place. Intentionally they withheld water and instead of 87,500 acres, we are able to irrigate only 30,000 acres in RDS Basin. Is it not a violation of the Bachawat Award? I would like to ask this question to our former Prime Minister hon. Shri Deve Gowda and other colleagues who spoke that they are very loyal, liberal, congenial, cooperative and law-abiding. I leave it to wisdom.

MR. CHAIRMAN : Please conclude now.

DR. MANDA JAGANNATH : Sir, please give two minutes.

I will now come to Paragodu project. The 1892 and 1933 agreements very clearly say that any such type of project could not be taken out on Chitravati river without the consent of the lower riparian areas. They came out with the version that it is for drinking water. We are very happy. Wherever they are, be it Maharashtra, Karnataka or Andhra Pradesh, the farmers are farmers. There should not be any discrimination.

Sir, I have a copy here. It is the modified version afterwards. The hon. Minister of Minor Irrigation of Karnataka, Shri Kumara Bangarappa has replied to a starred question in the Karnataka Assembly. … (Interruptions) I have said it is an old one. Let me complete it.

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : You are the third person to repeat it. Your leader has said it. You also say it.

DR. MANDA JAGANNATH : You please hear me. The hon. Minister is there to answer. Have you got any objection to my quoting it?

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : No objection; please go ahead.

DR. MANDA JAGANNATH : I quote :

"On Tuesday, during the question hour in the Legislative Assembly, above reply was given by the Minister to the question raised by Sampangi, MLA. He stated that water will be available not only for the drinking water supply to the Bagepalli and Gudibanda towns but also for 589 acres. He affirmed that the execution of this project will be done."

 

 Sir, please note the word ‘affirmed’. If it is such a case, we are happy if drinking water is given and we do not have any objection for this. Our apprehension is that if it is for drinking water for two villages only, why should it be that such a big project is constructed giving the scope and apprehension for doubt. Our apprehension is that it is not for drinking water and we have been repeatedly representing it.

Coming to some of the observations made by hon. Members, more so by our colleague and former Chief Minister, Shri Janardhana Reddy garu, he was mentioning about our Chief Minister. … (Interruptions)

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : Sir, if he is mentioning my name, I have to be permitted to answer it.

DR. MANDA JAGANNATH : Sir, you have already said it. That is why I am mentioning it. You have taken the name of our Chief Minister. You had your opportunity.

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : That is why I should be allowed to answer.

DR. MANDA JAGANNATH : On your observation only I am making my observation.

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : On your observation I will make my observation.

DR. MANDA JAGANNATH : It is Speaker’s discretion. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN : Dr. Jagannath, please conclude now.

DR. MANDA JAGANNATH : Sir, they said it is a war. The people of lower riparian areas are dying of hunger and are dying for lack of water for drinking and irrigation purposes. When people go to plead with them asking for reaction and saying to the brothers there that ‘both of us are human beings belonging to neighbouring States and we have cordial relations’, is it a sin? Is it a sin to go to plead with our brethren there? Do you call it a war? Had it been a war, were they carrying any lethal weapons? Our hon. Members have said it and called our MPs as Goondas and rowdies. I highly object to it. One of our colleagues said about our M.Ps. going there. It was not a war but it was a hunger cry. जब भूख लगता है, तो पेट में दर्द होता है। जब ज्यादा भूख लगती है, तो ज्यादा दर्द होता है। वैसा ही इसका हाल है। It was only to interact with them and to plead with them not to take such type of action where people from both the States would be suffering.

That is why, it is not a war, and it should not be called a war. Here, on the Cauvery issue, I would like to remind the House that -- it is strictly not related to the subject under discussion – But though the Supreme Court had given its verdict that certain amount of water had to be released to Tamil Nadu, the hon. Chief Minister of Karnataka… (Interruptions)

SHRI S. BANGARAPPA : What is this? I tell you that it is a deep conspiracy because you are always making a reference to Cauvery.

MR. CHAIRMAN : Please conclude now. I now give the floor to Shri Basavaraj.

DR. MANDA JAGANNATH : It is a fact. How can a Chief Minister instigate the farmers to go against the Supreme Court verdict, which is the highest and the apex Court of our country? Is it right? One should not do like that but for farmers’ sake Mr. Krishna must have taken that stand. As such our Chief Minister spelt it out, the farmers’ interest should be protected.

Finally, Sir, on the Telugu Ganga Project and all these things, whatever Os’ and IA’s are there, the Supreme Court have struck them down. We are not at fault. During Shri Deve Gowda’s period, when he was the Prime Minister, they were planning to increase the height of Almatti Dam up to 524 feet. … (Interruptions)

MR. CHAIRMAN: I have already called the name of Shri Basavaraj.

DR. MANDA JAGANNATH : Sir, let me make the last point.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Please make it in one sentence.

DR. MANDA JAGANNATH : They have planned to increase the height up to 524 feet, for Almatti Dam but the Supreme Court had restricted it to 519 feet. If there is no truth in our argument, then why did the Supreme Court restricted the height of Almatti Dam? They must answer this question.

Under these circumstances, my request to the Government of India, through you, Sir, is to see that all illegal constructions taken up by Karnataka should be stopped. Then, the Rajolibanda diversion scheme should be brought under the purview of the Tungabhadra Board.

   

SHRI G.S. BASAVARAJ (TUMKUR): Sir, thank you very much for having given me this opportunity to raise some important points regarding sharing of water between Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka.

Sir, it is a well-known fact that the dispute arose among the riparian States in 1960, in connection with the Krishna water dispute. Unfortunately, the Government of India has taken nine years to constitute a Tribunal for sharing of water. Shri K.L. Rao was the Union Minister and he had dodged this up to 1969 because they wanted to utilise maximum water by erecting 18ft height crest gates across Nagarjuna Sagar Dam. In 1969, the Tribunal was constituted. After that, the Bachawat Award has been given under Scheme A. Under the Scheme A, by allocating the return flows and other excess water, out of 2060 TMC of water, Karnataka was allocated 734 TMCFT of water, and Andhra Pradesh was allocated 811 TMCFT of water among all the riparian States. The Scheme A allocations were made the part of final order of the Tribunal and the same was published as a ‘decision’ on 31st May, 1976 by the Union Government under Section 6 of the Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956.

So far as Scheme B is concerned, I am not going to elaborate it, the surplus waters of 330 TMCFT are to be shared among the riparian States in the ratio of 25 per cent, 50 per cent and 25 per cent.

SHRI KALAVA SRINIVASULU : Sir, it is wrong. There is no final award. The final award is as per Scheme A. SHRI G.S. BASAVARAJ : I will tell you. It is a revised scheme. However, the Scheme B was not made a part of the final order, and the Tribunal observed that its implementation could be done by constituting the Inter-State River Authority: either by an agreement or by a law made by the Parliament.

On liberty to use surplus water by Andhra Pradesh, I will narrate one small point. The Tribunal further held that the State of Andhra Pradesh would have ‘liberty to use’ the surplus waters (without acquiring any rights), until Scheme B was enforced by constituting the Inter-State Regulatory Authority either by agreement or law made by Parliament. The Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in O.S.No.1 of 1997 filed by Karnataka interpreted ‘liberty to use’ surplus waters by its judgement dated 25th April 2000 and held that such uses cannot be by constructing any large-scale and permanent projects. Further, the Supreme Court directed the Union Government to act in this regard. Sir, with your permission, I quote the relevant observations here. They are:

"… it is appropriate for the Central Government to exercise the discretion while granting any scheme or projects of the lower riparian State and bearing in mind, what is really meant by the liberty granted, so that the lowest riparian State should not be allowed to proceed ahead with large scale water projects for utilisation of surplus waters in excess of allocated quantity over which the State has no right.

It is Central Government which has to exercise this discretion while clearing projects of the lowest riparian State and it should be so exercised that there should not be any apprehensions in the minds of the upper riparian States that for all times to come the right of sharing surplus water in any manner be endangered."

 

 This is our case. The Constitution Bench also held that Scheme B is only a recommendation of the Tribunal, but it shall not act as a blue print to the new Tribunal when constituted to allocate the surplus water.

Unfortunately, the Government of India has not constituted the Tribunal so far. Subsequent to the above judgement dated 25th April, 2000, despite repeated requests from our Chief Minister and Government, the Government of India has so far not constituted the Tribunal. That is what we are urging the Government of India to do. The Government of Karnataka has only two requests to make and they are: (1) constituting a Tribunal to allocate surplus waters in the Krishna basin, and (2) directing Andhra Pradesh to stop the unapproved projects and protect the surplus waters of Karnataka.

Our allegation is that Andhra Pradesh is utilising more than 300 tmc ft of water unauthorisedly by constructing the Telugu Ganga project, Srisailam Left Bank Canal, Srisailam Right Bank Canal, Pulichintala Diversion, and Biman Lift Irrigation Canal. All these are unauthorised projects which have already been constructed. Over and above their Scheme A share, they are utilising the Scheme B share also. The Government of India itself has admitted that Telugu Ganga project and Srisailam projects are not cleared by them. The Government of India have accepted it in their own letter.

I now come to Upper Tunga Project. We are now constructing a small barrage across Tunga river in Shimoga District.

SHRI KALAVA SRINIVASULU : He is misleading the House, Sir.

MR. CHAIRMAN : Please conclude now.

SHRI G.S. BASAVARAJ : Please give me two minutes, Sir. If you are not ready to allow me more time, at least allow me to lay the rest of my speech on the Table of the House.

MR. CHAIRMAN: You can conclude your speech within one minute.

SHRI G.S. BASAVARAJ : Kindly allow me two minutes, Sir.

Utilisation of 12.2 tmc feet of water in Upper Tunga Project is within the total allocation of 330 tmc feet permissible in Krishna Basin as per Scheme A allocation of the Tribunal. We are not utilising more than the share allotted to us. The Supreme Court, in O.S.1 of 1997, while rejecting similar allegations of Andhra Pradesh regarding Almatti Dam, has categorically held that the allocations of the Tribunal are not project-wise.

Sir, the amount of water which has been shared in favour of Karnataka is 729 TMC ft in scheme ‘A’ . It is not shared project wise. They have shared it in lump sum. Out of that share, we have utilised some share for Uppar Tunga Project and some on Almatti dam.

Sir, after making my last point, I am going to conclude. Some friends have made an allegation against Karnataka. Fortunately, they have got 245 TMC ft. of water available in both Nagarjunasagar as well as Jurala dam whereas we have got only 120 TMC ft. of water. So, unnecessarily, they are making an allegation that Karnataka is evading to release water. That is for them to clarify. But it is all baseless. They wanted to claim their share over Scheme-B water also.

Sir, from Godavari, there is a share of 26 TMC ft. of water to us, which the Government of India has not cleared so far. But it is being utilised by Andhra Pradesh. The undue delay in non-clearance is depriving Karnataka of its due share.

With these few words, I conclude.

SHRI PRABODH PANDA (MIDNAPORE) : Mr. Chairman, Sir, first of all, I would like to thank you for calling my name to participate on this subject. The matter is regarding sharing of river water between the two States -- Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh.

Sir, the matter is being raised here, while our Government is contemplating inter-linking of rivers all over the country. We have witnessed the controversy of sharing of water among southern States, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Kerala and so on and so forth.

It is really amazing. When the conceptual plan is going to be materialized, what would be the fate of our country? We can easily imagine it. The controversy will be spread all over the country. I do not know as to what really is the position of the inter-linking of rivers all over the country. We are quite in dock.

So, I would request the hon. Minister that if he is kind enough to call a meeting of all the political parties and different organizations to achieve the consensus, it will be good for us. If any discussion takes place in this august House, it will be good for all of us.

Sir, we are now discussing about the sharing of inter-State river water between Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. Water is not a property. It is a precious natural resource. No person or a company or a State can be allowed to monopolize or play politics over water.

It is known that Karnataka is an upper riparian State and Andhra Pradesh is a lower riparian State. If we talk about river Krishna, it is an inter-State river. No particular State, be it upper riparian or lower riparian, should have the legal or moral right to monopolize its water according to the needs. According to the international law, lower riparian State’s rights have to be protected.

The hon. Members from Karnataka have stated that the present crisis has been aggravated due to the shortage of water. It is told that if there was ample water, then this problem would not have arisen.

Sir, may I submit that the distribution of water be taken only in case of surplus water?

What would happen in case of a distress? In case of distress, will upper riparian States have the privilege to take all the waters, and the lower ones will not get even a drop of it? So, there should be a distress-sharing formula. We should depend on that also. If Pakistan can have its due share of Indus water from India; if Bangladesh can have its due share of the Ganges from India, then why would the distress formula not be framed and carried out in these States also?

Sir, so far we know that regarding Krishna dispute, the Union Government constituted the Krishna Water Dispute Tribunal (KWDT) in 1969. The Report should have been reviewed much earlier. The time has come also to review it as early as possible. We come to know that Karnataka, Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh have requested the Union Government to set up a Krishna Water Dispute Tribunal for adjudication; and for having proper and realistic decision. But it has not been done so far. The Union Government has taken up the matter, and dealt with the matter in a casual manner. They have rendered only lip service, rather they have played the role of an onlooker. It is alleged that the Karnataka Government have constructed a few dams without prior permission of the Central Government. The allegation is that new construction of dams across Krishna and Tungabhadra rivers are blocking the flow of water to Andhra Pradesh. If it is so, is it not the denial or violation of the Report of the first Tribunal? The Union Government should see and should take the initiative effectively. The Tungabhadra and Pennar should see as to whether Tungabhadra and Pennar sub-basins are totally violating the Inter-State agreement, and as to whether the agreement made in 1892 and 1933 have been violated or not. That should be seen. Once an expert Committee comprising four Chief Ministers, under the leadership of Shri Jyoti Basu, the former Chief Minister of West Bengal had been constituted. They have visited the areas, and have made some suggestions. What are those suggestions? We should know it. If it is possible, at the present juncture, such Committee comprising of the Chief Minister should be constituted. They should go there, and should make some suggestions for this.

   

प्रो. आई.जी.सनदी (धारवाड़ दक्षिण): सभापति महोदय, आपने मुझे बोलने के लिए समय दिया, इसके लिए मैं आपका आभारी हूँ।

महोदय, मुझे नेहरू जी की एक बात याद आती है। उन्होंने कहा था कि चुनकर आने के लिए हमें एक संसदीय क्षेत्र चाहिए, एक राज्य चाहिए। जब हम सब चुनकर संसद में आ जाते हैं तब हम भारत की जनता के प्रतनधि कहलाते हैं। भारत हम लोगों से ही बनता है। निर्वाचन के लिए सबके अलग-अलग क्षेत्र हैं। निर्वाचन के लिए अलग राज्य हैं। जब वहां से चुनकर आ गए तो हम सभी भारत की जनता के प्रतनधि कहलाते हैं। नेहरू जी ने कहा था कि हमारे राज्य से भी देश बहुत बड़ा और महान होता है। इसलिये देश की चिन्ता हमारा परम कर्तव्य होना चाहिए। हमारे देश में आंध्रा प्रदेश है, हमारे देश में तमिलनाडु है, क्या कर्नाटक हमारे देश में नहीं है? इन सभी राज्यों का विकास, सभी राज्यों की उन्नति या उन्नयन हमारा लक्ष्य होना चाहिए।…( व्यवधान)कर्नाटक वाले हमेशा देते आ रहे हैं। अपर रिवेरियन स्टेट होने से हमने किसी का हक छीना नहीं है। हम अधिक त्याग, बलिदान दे रहे हैं। …( व्यवधान)ताली एक हाथ से नहीं बजती। कर्नाटक वाले अकेले ही झगड़ालू नहीं हो सकते। जो हमारा हक है, उसके लिए हम नरम नहीं रहेंगे, हम गरम भी हो सकते हैं। हम अपने हक के लिए लड़ेंगे।…( व्यवधान)

सभापति महोदय : आप आसन को संबोधित कीजिए।

प्रो. आई.जी.सनदी: सभापति जी, कृष्णा और कावेरी नदी जल विवाद को लेकर बहुत कुछ कहा जा रहा है। ऐसा लगता है कि यहां पानी नहीं बह रहा है बल्कि तीनों राज्यों के बीच में नफरत की नदी बह रही है और नफरत की नदी ही नहीं बह रही है, बल्कि कभी-कभी हम लोग आपस में युद्ध करने की स्थिति में पहुंच जाते हैं। जैसा उस तरफ से कहा गया, मैं बताना चाहता हूं कि हम लोगों ने कोई चूड़ियां नहीं पहनी हुई हैं। मैं चाहता हूं कि हमारे बीच में नफरत की बजाय, तिरस्कार की भावना की बजाय, प्रेम की भावना बढ़े और प्रेम की नदी बहे। क्या हम ऐसा नहीं कर सकते? यदि हम एक दूसरे की भावना का सम्मान करें, तो सद्भावना क्यों नहीं बढ़ सकती। मुझे एक बात याद आ रही है।

सभापति महोदय : प्रेम की गंगा बहाते चलो।

प्रो. आई.जी.सनदी: जी हां, हम प्रेम की गंगा क्यों नहीं बहा सकते। हम अपनी ओर से प्रेम की गंगा बहा रहे हैं। इसलिए हमारा कोई झगड़ा नहीं है।

मुझे एक बात याद आ रही है जिसे मैं कहना चाहता हूं। बछावत आयोग के अनुसार तीनों राज्यों में जल का बंटवारा हो गया। मैं कहना चाहता हूं कि जो यह कहता है कि तेरा-तेरा, मेरा-मेरा कहने वाला महामानव है। तेरा तो तेरा मेरा पानी भी तेरा, कहने वाला देव मानव है, मेरा तो मेरा, तेरा भी मेरा कहने वाला राक्षस है। हम राक्षस न बनें और महामानव भी न बनें, क्या हम मानव बनकर नहीं रह सकते, अपने-अपने पानी को लेकर नहीं रह सकते? सहर्ष सद्भावना को लेकर कर्नाटक के मुख्य मंत्री जगह-जगह जा रहे हैं, लेकिन इन लोगों द्वारा इस तरह की भावना फैलाई जा रही है कि कर्नाटक के लोग हर स्टेट के साथ झगड़ा करते हैं, वे झगड़ालू प्रवृत्ति के हैं। मैं कहना चाहता हूं कि ताली एक हाथ से नहीं बजती।

महोदय, मैं निवेदन करना चाहता हूं कि प्रधान मंत्री जी इसमें हस्तक्षेप करें क्योंकि जो पीने के पानी की समस्या थी, वह तो हमे परगोड् पानी देकर दूर कर दी। अपर तुंगा, जहां से मैं आता हूं, शायद हम उसको दूसरा पंजाब बना सकते हैं, क्योंकि उन्होंने उस प्रोजैक्ट को भी क्लीयर कर दिया है, इसके लिए मैं उनका आभारी हूं, लेकिन जो पानी बहता हुआ चला जा रहा है, दूसरे राज्यों को जिससे ये अमीर हो गए हैं, कहीं उसमें एक बून्द कम होना, यह इनको सहन नहीं हो रहा है, क्योंकि अब इनको पानी की इम्पौर्टेंस पता लग गया है। कोई भूखे ही रहें और कोई खाते ही रहें, यह भावना ठीक नहीं है। हम आपका जो हक है, उसके लिए भी लड़ेंगे, लेकिन जो हमारा हक है, उसे तो हमारे पास रहने दीजिए, उसे तो मत छीनिए, उसके ऊपर क्यों झगड़ा करते हैं। मैं माननीय प्रधान मंत्री जी से अपील करता हूं, तीनों राज्यों ने मांग भी की है, बचे हुए ३३० टी.एम.सी. स्कीम ‘ बी’ का भी बंटवारा तीनों राज्यों के बीच करा दें, तो हम सब प्यार से, हंसते हुए, जैसे अब तक रहते आए हैं, वैसे ही कर्नाटक, आन्ध्राप्रदेश एवं तामिलनाडू, एक भाई की तरह, प्रेम के साथ रहेंगे। इसलिए मैं आदरणीय मंत्री महोदय से भी अपील करता हूं कि जल्दी से जल्दी फैसला करें और हमारे बीच में जो नफरत और तिरस्कार की भावना है उसे दूर करें और जैसा महोदय, आपने कहा प्रेम की गंगा बहाने का वह काम हम भी कर सकें।

   

*SHRI G. PUTTA SWAMY GOWDA (HASSAN): Mr Chairman Sir, I thank you for allowing this discussion in this august House. For the last 6 hours we are expressing our views about the sharing of Krishna and other rivers between Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. The hon. Members from Andhra Pradesh have made several allegations against Karnataka. I want to make it clear that there is no truth in the allegations.

It is the responsibility of the Centre to sort out the problems if there is inter-State water dispute between States. The Government of India has miserably failed in solving the river water dispute between Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh.

My colleague and friend Mr V. Dhananjaya Kumar has suggested that this issue should be solved through dialogues between the two States. My personal opinion is that this problem can’t be solved through discussions between the States. The Centre should intervene and find an amicable solution according to law. If this is not done there will be danger to the unity and integrity of our nation.

Central Water Commission (CWC) was set up in 2001. Even after 11 months and 11 days the tribunal has not been commissioned. Supreme Court has given its verdict in this regard. The Centre has to set up the tribunal within a period of 12 months. I think the Centre at least now will take appropriate action in this matter of urgent importance. The people throughout the State of Karnataka are very much agitated and therefore this problem has to be resolved amicably without any further delay.

20.00 hrs. Sir, the people of Karnataka are the most peace loving people in the country. They are the most cooperative people in the country. I would like to give an example. Mr Venkaiah Naidu has been elected to the Parliament not from *--------* English translation of the speech originally delivered in Kannada.

   

Andhra Pradesh but from Karnataka. He could have taken initiative in this matter and resolved the water dispute between Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. Unfortunately he did not do anything in this regard.* SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : No reference can be made to a member of the other House…. (Interruptions) A reference is being made about a member of the other House. This is not fair. He cannot make that remark…(Interruptions) Shri Venkaiah Naidu is the hon. Member of Rajya Sabha. His name cannot be referred here…. (Interruptions) I am only trying to draw the attention of the Chair.

सभापति महोदय : कंक्लुड किया जाए ।

*SHRI G. PUTTA SWAMY GOWDA : Hon. Members of Andhra Pradesh are blaming the President of Congress Party Smt. Soniaji for not taking initiative in this matter. She had sought some information from Andhra Pradesh Government on the basis of the representation received from the hon. Chief Minister of Karnataka. The members of Andhra Pradesh are taking objection to this also. This is not at all proper.

384 villages in Kolar district including Bagepalli taluk are affected by severe drought. This is the third consecutive year that they are facing such a drought situation. There is acute shortage of drinking water in these villages. The Andhra Pradesh members instead of sympathising make so many unwarranted statements. They say that a large group of 5000 people would cross the State border and enter Karnataka State to create problems. They go to the extent of saying that they would wage a war against Karnataka. They cannot take law into their hands and do whatever they want. Then it will be very difficult to maintain law and order in our State. However, it is the prime responsibility of the Centre to maintain law and order throughout the country. They say that they will fight for this cause*… SHRI KALAVA SRINIVASULU : Sir, it is most objectionable. He is speaking untruth… (Interruptions) The Government of Karnataka arrested our MPs and MLAs. We did not go there for fighting. We are for justice… (Interruptions)

*SHRI G. PUTTA SWAMY GOWDA: The hon. Prime Minister had made some unnecessary comments about the padayatra of our hon. Chief Minister in Mandya district. The problem of water is a matter of life and death for the people of Karnataka. The Chief Minister at that time thought that it was proper to go ahead with padayatra and accordingly he did it. Nobody can find fault with that.

The hon. Minister of Agriculture is here. I request him and the hon. Prime Minister to take special interest in this matter and to permanently solve this inter-State water dispute between Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh.

I thank you Sir once again and with these words conclude my speech*.

   

श्री रामदास आठवले (पंढरपुर) : सभापति महोदय, आन्ध्रा प्रदेश और कर्नाटक के बीच कृष्णा और कावेरी नदी के पानी का ठीक डिस्ट्रीब्यूशन होना चाहिए और हरेक को अपने शेयर मिलना चाहिए, इसी विषय पर यह चर्चा चल रही है।

पानी हरेक आदमी को जीवनदान देने वाला होता है, इसीलिए पानी के लिए बहुत बार संघर्ष भी हुआ है। अगर हम इतिहास को देखते हैं तो शाक्य और कोलों में इसी को लेकर संघर्ष हुआ था, युद्ध हुआ था, तब बुद्ध भी पैदा हुए थे। इसलिए मेरा कहना यह है कि -

‘पानी के लिए हुआ था युद्ध, इसलिए पैदा हुआ था बुद्ध, एक दूसरे पर मत बनो क्रुद्ध, अगर हम आपस में इसी तरह करते रहेंगे, तो दोबारा हो जायेगा, पानी के लिए युद्ध।’ कहने का मतलब है कि यह भारत सरकार की जिम्मेदारी है। पानी के लिए हमें अपने-अपने हक के लिए लड़ाई भी करनी चाहिए, मगर उसमें भारत सरकार की भी जिम्मेदारी है और मंत्री महोदय, सेठी साहब की भी जिम्मेदारी है। आपको चार साल सत्ता में आये हुए हो रहे हैं और आन्ध्रा प्रदेश में टी.डी.पी. के आपके २९ एम.पीज. हैं।…( व्यवधान) मैं याद नहीं दिला रहा हूं, मगर यह आपकी जिम्मेदारी है। अगर आपको अपना हक चाहिए तो खाली कर्नाटक और आन्ध्रा प्रदेश दोनों को एक साथ बैठाकर हल नहीं होगा, उसके लिए भारत सरकार की भी जिम्मेदारी है। कर्नाटक का कहना है कि हमारे पास एक्सस वाटर नहीं है और आन्ध्रा प्रदेश का कहना यह है कि हमें हमारा हिस्सा मिलना चाहिए। कृष्णा रीवर महाराष्ट्र में भी जाती है, इसलिए महाराष्ट्र को भी हिस्सा मिलना चाहिए। अगर कर्नाटक और आन्ध्रा प्रदेश झगड़ा करने का प्रयत्न करेंगे तो हमें भी झगड़ा शुरू करना होगा। महाराष्ट्र को भी कृष्णा नदी का पानी मिलना चाहिए। इसलिए कन्क्लूजन यह है कि भारत सरकार को इस विवाद को हल करने के लिए दोनों राज्यों को एक साथ बुलाना चाहिए।

दोनों राज्यों के मुख्य मंत्रियों को बुलाकर इस इश्यू को हल करना चाहिए, यह हमारी आपसे मांग है।

अंत में मैं कहना चाहता हूं कि:--

"लोगों को पीने के लिए नहीं मिलेगा जल, तो देश का कैसे बढ़ेगा बल ।"

 

 अगर देश का बल बढ़ाना है तो हरेक आदमी को पानी पिलाने की आवश्यकताहै । आप लोग ठीक ढंग से पानी नहीं पिलायेंगे तो आपको पानी पीना पड़ेगा।

अगर हम पानी की शेयर पालिसी को ठीक ढंग से नहीं बनायेंगे तो कैसे मिलेगा कर्नाटक, आंध्रा प्रदेश और महाराष्ट्र को फल"।

 

 इसलिए फल देने के लिए हमें तदनुकूल पालिसी बनानी चाहिए।

 

*SHRI GUTHA SUKENDER REDDY (NALGONDA): Mr Chairman Sir, the attitude of the Karnataka Government in sharing river waters whether it is Cauveri or Krishna, is causing concern to one and all. Our Parliamentary Party leader Shri Yerranaidu has initiated a discussion under rule 193 to discuss the issue in depth and I support the motion. Congress, which ruled the country for 40 years, is in the saddle in Karnataka. It is expected that the Congress would rise above petty and parochial considerations and would approach the problems with national spirit. It is the bounden duty of that party to protect the rights of every State. But unfortunately succumbing to local pressures, it is creating problems to both Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh. As of now, Karnataka has 110 tmc of water already in Almatty dam which has a capacity of 129 tmc. It has no Ayacut. Deliberately they are storing water there only to see that Andhra doesn’t get any water. Sir, there is no water in Srisailam project. There is no water in Nagarjun Sagar. The entire farming community in Krishna basin, which suffered a lot during last year due to acute drought, is once again in trouble this year. The Karnataka Government has a responsibility to release water from Almatty. It is equally the responsibility of the President of Indian National Congress who also happens to be the leader of Opposition in this august House. Sir, Karnataka Government is neither implementing court order or awards of the tribunals. The hon. Members hailing from Karnataka are saying that they stand for friendly and cordial relationship with Telugu people. But unfortunately they are not in a position to release to Andhra Pradesh its due share of Krishna waters. In my district and especially in my constituency, people have no proper drinking water. They are forced to drink water which is full of fluorine. As such they are subjected to fluorisis and many other ailments. MPs belonging to Karnataka are saying that they had undertaken the construction of Paragodu project only to provide drinking water facility to __________________________________________________________________* English translation of speech originally delivered in Telugu.

people who reside there. How about the people who are residing in our State, in my district and constituency, who are subjected to the same hardship. It is the responsibility of the hon. Members hailing from Karnataka and the Karnataka Government itself to view the whole situation with humanitarian approach. It is also the responsibility of the Central Government to see that construction of all projects like Upper Tunga and Upper Bhadra and also other projects in Krishna basin are halted at once. Hon. Mani Shankar Iyer observed that all regional parties are politically motivated. It is not so. It is because of the misrule of Congress Party for the past 40 years, so many regional parties have emerged on the horizon. These parties have emerged to deliver the people from the clutches of Congress misrule. In our State, Shri N.T. Rama Rao founded Telugu Desam Party in order to save the State from Congress misrule. We have come to power also. We are ruling the State today and I am sure we would continue to rule the State in future as well. Even in the Centre too, only a party or alliance which enjoys our support would be in power. Congress party’s dreams of coming back to power will never materialise. I appeal to the Congressmen to pick up a lesson or two, at least now. They should treat all the States equally and should not mete out step motherly treatment to the States which are being ruled by non-Congress Governments. The Congress MPs should impress upon their leader and see that share of water due for Andhra and Tamil Nadu are released at once. I take this opportunity to request the Union Government to see that all illegal construction of projects by Karnataka are stopped at once. – Jai Hindi – Jai Janma Bhoomi.

                   

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Sir, the Chair had promised to give me two to three minutes to seek small clarifications.

MR. CHAIRMAN : No. You cannot speak twice.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Sir, you may give me permission after the Minister’s reply.

THE MINISTER OF WATER RESOURCES (SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI): I am thankful to all the hon. Members who have participated in this particular debate spreading over from 2 p.m. to 8.15 p.m. and the number of speakers who have participated in this particular debate comes to 23. So, almost all the Members hailing from Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh have participated in this debate. I am really grateful to them. They have drawn the attention of the Government to many important problems concerning water dispute. Once again, I am thankful to them.

Before going into the subject matter, I would like to make some points clear. Shri Mani Shankar Aiyar, while speaking about the National Water Policy, has levelled many allegations against the Government. He has said that the Government has done nothing during these two-and-a-half years. So, before going into the subject matter of this particular discussion, I would like to clarify some of the points raised by Shri Mani Shankar Aiyar.

At the outset, he has raised a point about the National Water Policy. He has said that nothing new is there and the Government has taken no action having this National Water Policy. Of course, in my intervention, I said that the National Water Policy has been revised. But he did not accept my response. However, for his kind information, I would like to just read out a few sentences about the National Water Policy. I do admit that the National Water Policy was first adopted in the year 1987. I certainly admit it. But, at the same time, on 1st April, 2002, we had updated it and mentioned it in the Resolution on National Water Policy. As I said, I would like to read a few sentences.

"National Water Resources Council, in its second meeting held on 9th September, 1987, adopted the National Water Policy. This Policy has since been guiding the formation of policy and programmes for water resources development and its management. During the last 14 years, many new challenges have emerged in water resources sector which has necessitated the review of the existing National Water Policy.

Accordingly, the revised and updated Draft National Water Policy finalised by the Working Group has been considered and deliberated upon in the Fifth Meeting of the National Water Resources Council held on the 1st April, 2000. Some of the modifications have also been suggested by the Members and agreed to by the Council."

 

 So, this Policy was adopted on 1st April, 2000 after having deliberated on all the points which needed updating.

श्री गुथा सुकेन्दर रेड्डी: पहले आप हमारा रिप्लाई देने के बाद उनका दीजिए।…( व्यवधान)

SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI: Certainly I will reply to your points. I assure you that I will reply to your points. … (Interruptions) Certainly it is also important. Hear me for a few minutes.

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : He cannot settle Karnataka--Andhra Pradesh dispute excepting the framework of the National Water Policy. What the Minister is doing is as logical as what these people are saying is illogical. … (Interruptions)

SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI: Shri Mani Shankar Aiyar is a very learned Member. He knows things more than anybody else. He should at least have patience and should read what has been mentioned in the preface as well as the contents of the National Water Policy. He has raised many points. Of course, those are not relevant to this particular discussion. I have already stated that if the details of the National Water Policy are gone through, Shri Mani Shankar Aiyar and other hon. Members will come to know about the new items that have been incorporated in the Policy. I do not want to dwell upon this point further.

I would like to thank the mover of the Motion, Shri Yerrannaidu. He has brought to our notice many new points. He has drawn the attention of the Government to many issues.

The hon. Members have raised in this House certain issues in connection with the river valley projects under construction by the respective States on the inter-State rivers namely, Krishna, Pennar and Godavari. Particular attention of the House has been drawn to projects, namely Upper Tunga, Tungabhadra Dam, Rajolibunda Diversion Scheme, Almatti Dam, Srisailam left and right bank canals, Telugu Ganga project, etc. in the Krishna basin; new barrages under construction in the Manjira, a tributary of the Godavari; and Paragodu Dam project in Chitravati, a tributary of the Pennar. These issues were raised by hon. Member, Shri K. Yerrannaidu. Other hon. Members also touched upon these points.

While taking note that the issues raised are of utmost importance to the States of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh, I would like to inform the hon. Members that the development of water resources through various projects for the beneficial use is done by the respective State Governments in their territories. The projects mentioned here are all on the inter-State rivers. The developments on the inter-State rivers are governed by the existing agreements, as mentioned by the hon. Members time and again while speaking on the subject, between the States or by the Tribunal Awards, where such Awards are available. Any issue raised by the party States regarding violations of provisions of existing agreements or of Tribunal Awards by the other party State are resolved through mutual negotiations between the States with or without the assistance and facilitation by the Central Government. The role of the Central Government in such matters is that of a facilitator and the Centre has fulfilled this role effectively whenever the need arose.

The procedure adopted by the Centre in clearing the river valley projects is very transparent to allay any fears of the riparian States. Central teams are visiting the project sites and holding discussions with the party States whenever matters are brought to the notice of the Central Government. Inter-State meetings are called to discuss the issues threadbare to find out an amicable solution. This aspect has been highlighted by many hon. Members, particularly by the former Prime Minister of India Shri H.D. Deve Gowda, by Shri Yerrannaidu and also by the other hon. Members. In the case of issues raised in the House connected with the projects mentioned, the Central Government has adopted the same line of action. In case any issue is pending, the same could be discussed and sorted out.

I would like to inform the House that a Central team along with officers from the State of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh visited the site of Paragodu Dam Project and held disussion on 15th and 16th June, 2003 as has been mentioned by many hon. Members. Already, the Central team consisting of one senior officer from the CWC of the Government of India visited the site and held discussion not only with the State Government officials of Andhra Pradesh but also discussed with the State Government officials of Karnataka. Further, the Chairman, Central Water Commission convened an inter-State meeting on 27th June, 2003 to discuss the issues raised by Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh. The matters concerning some of the projects raised by Andhra Pradesh have been taken up with Karnataka, thereafter.

Some of the hon. Members have said that the Central Government has failed in its attempt to resolve the problem. These problems or issues are really complicated. We have tried and made a sincere effort to resolve the issue by sitting across the table. But the way emotions have been roused and patience has been exhibited at this juncture of time, it is very difficult to arrive at a consensus on these issue. But our efforts are on to find out an amicable settlement of these disputes, especially the disputes the hon. Members have mentioned.

With regard to Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal, I would like to inform the House that the Central Government had constituted the Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal in April, 1969 - this has been mentioned by the hon. Members - to adjudicate water disputes of Krishna. The Tribunal submitted its report and decision in 1976. The decision was published by the Central Government in the Official Gazettee on 31st May, 1976. As per the direction of the Tribunal , at any time after 31st May, 2000, the orders of the Tribunal may be reviewed or revised by a competent authority or another Tribunal. As has been mentioned in the other House, this Tribunal is going to be set up very soon and within another 15 days, it would be set up. This is my categorical answer to this particular point relating to the Tribunal.

The Central Government received requests under Section 3 of the Inter-State River Water Disputes (ISRWD) Act, 1956. The stipulation is there. The stipulation about the Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal is that unless the requests are made by the States concerned suo motu, the Tribunal cannot be appointed or constituted.

In this regard, the Central Government received requests under Section 3 of the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956 from the States of Karnataka, Maharashtra and Andhra pradesh in October, 2002, December 2002 and January, 2003 respectively requesting for constitution of a Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal under Section 4 of the ISRWD Act, 1956 and referring to the Tribunal for adjudication and decision, the water disputes and matters connected therewith or relevant to water disputes emerging from the letters of complaint.

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : Mr. Chairman, Sir, when the Tribunal is constituted, it should be constituted with a mandate that it should come out with an award within a given time. Otherwise there is no point, if it goes on for years.

SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI: Shri Dhananjaya Kumar, this point has been mentioned by some hon. Members. We have amended the Inter-State Water Disputes Act of 1956 in the year 2002 and, accordingly, a time frame has been fixed so that there will not be any difficulty in giving the Award in a specifi time period.

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : Could you just explain what is the time frame?

           

SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI: I have mentioned that the request should come from the concerned States and within one year, the Central Government is to constitute the Tribunal . The Tribunal is to give its Report within a specific period of time. In the earlier Act 1956 no time limit was fixed. As per the requests made, it will be constituted by 31st of this month and we are constituting it before the 31st.

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : I seek your clarification. Does the amendment provide that the Tribunal should be constituted within a time frame or that award should be given within a time frame?

SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI: Both are there.

SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR: If both are there, then what is the time frame for giving the award after the constitution of the Tribunal?

SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI: The time frame that has been made is three years. Within three years the tribunal Constituted have to give the Award and also within three years’ time, they have to give the award. If they do not give the Award within three years period of time, they can have another two years of grace period. Prior to this amendment, there was no time frame fixed at all. We had adopted this improvement in the new amendment which has been passed recently in the year 2002.

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : Why do you not reduce it to one year?… (Interruptions)

SHRI V. DHANANJAYA KUMAR : By this amendment, Andhra Pradesh will continue to get the benefit of 330 TMC feet of water. I am only bringing this to the notice of my hon. friend, Shri Yerrannaidu. He can be very happy for another five years and enjoy that.

सभापति महोदय : धनंजय कुमार जी, माननीय मंत्री जी का उत्तर पूरा होने दें।

SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI: As per the Act, the second Tribunal to adjudicate water dispute of Krishna is to be constituted within one year. As I have stated earlier, a request is received from the party States and the Central Government is processing the request for constituting the second Tribunal for Krishna Water Dispute within a time frame. I assure the Members that the Central Government will provide all assistance to solve the problem keeping in view the interests of the party States. I hope with the active co-operation of the hon. Members and the accommodating response from the State Governments, we will be able to find an amicable solution to the concerns raised by hon. Members and I am looking forward to such a situation.

Many times, the stipulation of the Krishna Water Tribunal has been raised by hon. Members here on the floor of the House. They have certainly quoted from the award and they have certainly pointed out the stipulations made there. Claims and counter-claims have been made here because of certain deficiencies, if I am allowed to say, on the part of the concerned States. What is the stipulation made by this award of the Krishna Water Dispute Tribunal?

I would like to invite the attention of the hon. Members to Clause 13 of the Award given by the Krishna Water Dispute Tribunal. As per the Award, the States have to exchange the utilisation data as specified under Clause 13. I would like to quote this, because this is very much relevant to this particular debate. The reasons for this dispute and, sometimes, unncessary disputes have been arisen overlooking the stipulations of the Award of the Krishna Water Dispute Tribunal and the party states have not obeyed. The Clause 13 of the Award says:

"(a) Each State shall prepare and maintain annually for each water year complete detail and accurate records of annual water diversion outside the Krishna River Basin;

 

  Annual usage for irrigation works using less than 1 TMC; Annual usage for irrigation works from all other projects and works; Annual usage for domestic and municipal water supply; Annual usage for industrial purposes; Annual usage for irrigation within the Krishna River Basin from projects using 3 TMC or more annually; Areas irrigated and duties adopted for irrigation from irrigation works using less than 1 TMC annually; Estimated annual evaporation losses from reservoirs and storages using 1 TMC or more annually; Formula used and co-efficiency adopted for measuring discharges at project site.

Each State shall send annually to the other State a summary abstract of the said records. The said records shall be open to inspection of all the States through their accredited representatives for a reasonable time at a reasonable place or places."

 

 The exchange of the above data as stipulated by the Krishna Water Dispute Tribunal has not taken place between the States. This is very important. In the absence of the exchange of water utilisation data, the Central Water Commission was considering maximum return flow permitted in the Award for appraisal. This was first started when the water availability for Srisailam Project of Andhra Pradesh was considered. Thereafter, the Central Water Commission has adopted consistently this view with regard to the return flow for the other two States.

Sir, this is the most crucial point of this particular discussion. If this data could have been exchanged between the concerned States, a particular State could have personally verified as to how much water the other State is using and the other State also could have personally verified as to how much water the other State is using. In the absence of exchange of this data of water use, as has been stipulated by the Krishna Water Dispute Tribunal, these disputes have cropped up. So, I would request all the hon. Members and leaders from different parties of different States that they should persuade their respective States to adopt this practice of exchange of water utilisation data. Unless they verify each other’s data, certainly the other State will have some suspicion. They will have their own doubts.

This particular stipulation of the Award, I think, has been overlooked and has not been adhered to. As a result, this impasse has been created not only inside the House but also in different States. So, I would request the concerned States that they have to exchange this data, as per the stipulation made in the Award of the Tribunal.

Sir, I am very much available to each and every Member of Parliament and my officers are available to have discussion with different States as well as, if possible, with their respective state officers concerned.

So, I request you to please prevail upon the State Governments concerned. They should exchange the data among themselves. If they do so, the problem will really be solved. I request Shri Yerrannaidu and also many other honourable senior Members that they should request their respective States in this respect.

So far as the projects are concerned, I have stated here how a misunderstanding has arisen. After all, why has this misunderstanding arisen? It is because no data have been exchanged between the States. As a result, The State Government in Andhra Pradesh says that Karnataka is using so much of water and the Karnataka Government says that Tamil Nadu is using in excess of their allotted quota of water. So, I would like to assure the hon. Members that if there has been any arithmetical error or error of judgment on the part of my officers in the CWC, we are certainly open to revise it so far as Upper Tunga is concerned. This much I can say here.

Similarly, about the Paragodu project, as has been stated and clarified by hon. Members, I would like to point out one thing. I admit that we have written a letter to the officers in the State Government of Karnataka that the Paragodu project seems to be a drinking water project. But at the same time, we have also drawn their attention to the parameters which they have adopted about the dependability of water yield. So far as drinking water project is concerned, certainly, it is erroneous. We have drawn the attention of the Karnataka Government to revise the height of the dam. As has been mentioned by an hon. Member, top priority has been given for drinking water. The Central Government has given top priority to the drinking water project. But if it is a drinking water project, certainly, the competent authority to decide on the parameters is the Central Public Health Environmental Engineering Organisation at the Central level. As per their prescription, they have to adhere to the criteria which they have adopted. But so far as this organisation is concerned, as I have mentioned, the parameters about the Paragodu project are certainly more than the prescribed parameters.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : You have to refer that project to that organisation.

SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI: In this particular case, we have already done it.

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU: We have no objection for drinking water. The norms at the national level should be followed. … (Interruptions)

सभापति महोदय : रिप्लाई पूरा होने दीजिए।

… (Interruptions)

SHRI R.L. JALAPPA : This is for the first time in the country. … (Interruptions) There were no such parameters fixed for any project. … (Interruptions)

सभापति महोदय: मनिस्टर का रिप्लाई पूरा होने दीजिए।

SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI: Sir, the hon. Member is a senior Member of this particular House. So, I am open for having a discussion with him. This particular organisation – Central Public Health Environmental Engineering Organisation – is under the control of the Ministry of Urban Development.

So far as other things are concerned, I would not go into the details of these issues. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K.H. MUNIYAPPA: What are the parameters, please tell this august House. … (Interruptions)

SHRI ARJUN CHARAN SETHI: Please hear me. I am going to say about unapproved projects in the country We have asked the State Governments to furnish the details. After getting the details of these unapproved projects, certainly we will take a decision and I will inform the House also.

We have signed Indus Water Treaty with Pakistan. We have signed Ganga Water Treaty with Bangladesh. You can see how in a proper manner they are functioning and working since 1960. The Indus Water Treaty has been signed and since 1960 this has been working very well in spite of the fact that we have fought three wars with Pakistan. Similarly, with Bangladesh, we are having a Ganga River Water Treaty and it is also functioning very well. When these agreements are functioning well with our neighbouring countries, why do we have problem between the states in the country? We are all Indians. India is our motherland. So, I appeal to all the hon. Members and all the States that they should have some patience. They should discuss the issue in a very amicable manner and in a very good atmosphere, without arousing passion.

With these words I conclude, Sir.

… (Interruptions)

सभापति महोदय : साढ़े छ: घंटे तक बहस हुई।

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU : Sir, I am the Mover, I should be given the first chance for clarifications… (Interruptions)

सभापति महोदय : मूवर को कोई रॉइट नहीं होता।

… (Interruptions)

सभापति महोदय : मंत्री जी ने जवाब दे दिया है। अब इसमें बहस की कोई गुंजाइश नहीं है। स्पष्टीकरण की कोई गुंजाइश अब नहीं है।

… (Interruptions)

SHRI N. JANARDHANA REDDY : Sir, regarding the Upper Tunga project, the hon. Minister was kind enough to say that if the CWC and its members have done anything by mistake, he would try to correct it. I am happy that he has announced it. Meanwhile, will he ask the Karnataka Government to go slow in the matter?… (Interruptions)

SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU: Sir, there are two issues regarding Paragodu and Upper Tunga. The hon. Minister has clarified that and we are happy about that. We have submitted our information. Meanwhile, the Government of India should ask the Karnataka Government to stop these projects. Our issues are quite genuine.

As far as Rajollybunda Diversion Scheme is concerned, they are utilising 1.20 TMC ft. more, which is under the control of Karnataka Government. Our demand is that the Presidential Order should be changed and that it should be brought under the control of Tungabhadra Board, which is jointly controlled by both the States. Everybody will agree to that. Sir, out of 17.1 TMC ft., we are getting only 15.9 TMC ft. of water. With regard to Manjera Basin, we have shown so many photographs and we have circulated them to the Ministry of Water Resources too. The Ministry can send a team and if the objections raised by the Government of Andhra Pradesh are true, then the hon. Minister should ask the Karnataka Government to stop them without any delay… (Interruptions)

सभापति महोदय : जवाब पूरा हो गया है।

… (Interruptions)

सभापति महोदय : सदन की कार्यवाही कल तक के लिये स्थगित की जाती है।

20.49 hrs. The Lok Sabha then adjourned till Eleven of the Clock on Tuesday, August 05, 2003/14 Sravana, 1925(Saka) _______________