The serene waters of the river Mahanadi continue to fray many a nerve in Orissa and Chhattisgarh for over a year now. Never has this watercourse evoked more acrimony than it has in recent months courtesy highhandedness of Chhattisgarh. The issue has been all over media with its echoes reverberating in state assemblies, Parliament, NGT and in Supreme Court.
MAHA WAR OF NERVES
CENTRE, STATE DIFFER ON ISSUES RELATING TO NEGOTIATIONS
New Delhi: The dispute over sharing of Mahanadi River waters between Chhattisgarh and Orissa is only getting escalated in the light of allegations and counter allegations being made by each side.
A close look at developments in the last one year reveals that due to prolonged non-cooperation between the state and the Centre, the trust deficit and disagreements over mode of negotiations are ruining the prospects of resolving the Mahanadi controversy.
The war of words sparked when Orissa Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik wrote to the Prime Minister July 4 last year asking him to intervene and persuade the Chhattisgarh government to stop their ongoing projects on the Mahanadi basin which were undertaken without apprising the state.
“I would request your good office to advise the Chhattisgarh government to immediately stop the unilateral construction of such major structures across Mahanadi,” the concluding lines of the letter
said. Subsequently, a series of inter-state meetings, other committee meetings, a tripartite meeting between Orissa and Chhattisgarh CMs and the then Union Water Resources Minister Uma Bharti had been held. But they were all in vain. There were a number of instances where the involved parties failed to get on board and work in tandem to resolve the issue.
In the maiden such inter-state meeting, mediated by the Central Water Commission (CWC) July 29 last year, it was decided that the CWC would invariably ensure that the DPRs for the projects in Mahanadi basin which are appraised by it, to be duly shared with each other riparian states.
At the same meeting, talks about setting up of a Joint Control Board as envisioned in the 1983 bilateral agreement between Orissa and undivided Madhya Pradesh were held where Chhattisgarh had agreed but Orissa sought time to respond. Later, it went against the view. Ultimately, the state government, after getting the nerve of the situation and failure of the tripartite meeting of the CMs and Union minister, wrote to the Centre November 19 last year seeking constitution of a tribunal to resolve the issue under the provisions of the Inter-State River Water Dispute Act, 1956.
However, the Centre, instead of setting up a tribunal, offered them a
Negotiation Committee comprising 12 members including engineer in
chief from Orissa and Chhattisgarh and other members from the Central
government.
Since the formation of the Negotiation Committee, trust deficit between Orissa and the Centre has started as the state wrote to the Centre making its stand clear on its non-participation in the panel
meetings. The CM also told the PM through correspondence that this panel can only delay the matters. Letters to the Centre from the state Water Resource Ministry, Chief Secretary, Engineer-in-Chief also
followed on their reservations about the Negotiation Committee.
Later, the Centre accused the state government of concealing the facts and figures as required by the Negotiation Committee and also by a team of the National Institute of Hydrology, Roorkee, which was asked to undertake a study on Mahanadi in relation to the dispute. The state too countered the Centre by counter-allegations of being partisan and accused the Union government of failing to mediate.
NO SOLUTION ON HORIZON
A solution to the raging controversy of the Mahanadi river does not seem to be in sight even if a tribunal is constituted by an order of the Supreme Court. It is likely to take its own time from
constitution to the final verdict.
From the past experiences of the Inter-State River Dispute Tribunals, it is evident that lots of time is lost in the process from the constitution of the tribunal to its judgment. Orissa itself has been part of the Vansadhara Tribunal.
The state government had in February 2006 asked the Centre under Section 3 of the Inter-State River Water Disputes (ISRWD) Act, 1956 dealing with water disputes between the government of Orissa and the government of Andhra Pradesh pertaining to the Vansadhara river to constitute an Inter-State Water Disputes Tribunal for adjudication.
In case of Vansadhara, three interstate meetings were held but in vain. Meanwhile, the state government approached the Supreme Court for the same where hearings started in 2007 and in 2009 and the SC ordered forming of a tribunal to settle the matter. The tribunal delivered its first verdict in 2013 which was later challenged by the state government and it remained sub judice.
According to the ISRWD Act, the tribunal should investigate the matters referred to it and forward its recommendations to the Centre setting out the facts and its decision on the mattes within three
years. Subsequent extensions are given based on the case.
Varied readings of 1983 agreement add fuel to fire
New Delhi: The tussle among Orissa, Chhattisgarh and Centre has also escalated due to the different reading of the Clause 11 of the 1983 agreement signed between Orissa and the undivided Madhya Pradesh relating to the formation of a Joint Control Board.
Section 11 of the agreement reads, “MP and Orissa agree to establish Joint Control Board to review the progress, from time to time of survey, investigation, planning, execution and preparation of Joint
Inter-State Irrigation and/or Power Projects and to discuss and resolve any issues.”
The Centre in its statement to the Supreme Court recently had said, “The Joint Control Board, which could have resolved many of the issues between the two States, has not been set up, basically because of the recalcitrance of the Orissa government as the Chhattisgarh government has shown its willingness to set up the same.”
However, in its counter-statement, the Orissa government said, “In a letter dated 18.1.2017, Orissa government told the Centre that in the last three and a half decades, none of the joint projects have been taken up by the States. And, since no joint project has been taken up, it was probably thought unnecessary to establish the Joint Control Board.”
It also added that at no point of time, it appears from our record immediately available, that the government of Chhattisgarh had sought for the establishment of Joint Control Board.
However, as per the minutes of the tripartite meeting among CMs of Orissa and Chhattisgarh and mediated by the then Union Water Resources Minister Uma Bharti also claim that although Chhattisgarh was in favour of establishment of a Joint Control Board for long term solution, it agreed to the formation of an Expert Committee as suggested by the Orissa government. The 1983 agreement was signed by
the then Orissa CM JB Patnaik and the then Madhya Pradesh CM Arjun Singh in the presence of 20 other officials and now has become a bone of contention for the parties involved.
Echoes heard in Parl
New Delhi: Several Members of Parliament (MPs) hailing from Orissa had repeatedly raised the issue of the Mahanadi in both houses of Parliament and had asked the Centre to intervene and their neigbouring
state to stop construction works on the Mahanadi basin.
The parliamentarians had been seen raising the issue either through the Question Hour seeking responses from the government through Zero Hour, or through protests outside Parliament House or by holding a special discussion in the Lok Sabha last year. In the Monsoon Session, BJD MP from Cuttack told the Lok Sabha, “We have concerns for a permanent tribunal on water disputes. But the
matter of concern is that the process of establishment of a tribunal for Mahanadi has been delayed and that is why we moved the Supreme Court.” He also asked the Centre for early establishment of a tribunal and ask Chhattisgarh government to stop construction on the catchment areas of the Mahanadi river.
Chief Whip of the party in the Lok Sabha, Tathagata Satpathy in February this year told the Lower House, “There are times when for a period of 90 days the inflow into the Hirakud dam in Orissa has been
zero which is sad. As a riperine state, we have every right over the river flowing through our state as other upstream states have. Orissa is not denying the rights to other states and thus other states should
also not deny the rights of other states into the matter.”
Sambalpur MP Nagendra Pradhan said, “Such vast diversity of the Satkosia will be vulnerable to threats if the barrages made by the Chhattisgarh government on the Mahanadi come into effect.”
Mahanadi spinoff to hit state ecosystem
Species living in Chilika, Bhitarkanika and Satkosia will be hit
New Delhi: The peculiar ecosystem in the coastal parts of Orissa is likely to get affected if the surplus Mahanadi river waters are deviated.
The state government in its complaint to the Supreme Court has alleged that the planned excessive utilisation of Mahanadi waters by the Chhattisgarh government is beyond the equitable share and is likely to have an adverse effect on the state. Such a deviation is likely to have a direct impact on the biodiversity-rich hotspots like Chilika Lake and Bhitarkanika, the state government said.
Experts believe these hotspots are home to a number of important flora and fauna and they survive only because of the peculiar water and substrata which are often formed by the mixture of sea and Mahanadi river waters and any deviation in the flow of fresh water can endanger
these species.
“Chilika Lake and mangrove forest area in Bhitarkanika in Orissa are able to host numerous endemic flora and fauna because of the peculiar combination of the fresh water and salt water. A deviation in the flow of fresh water in case of imbalance in the supply of Mahanadi river can have a direct impact on their lives,” says environmentalist Sankar Prasad Pani.
According to government data, Chilika Lake hosts 211 bird species, including 97 intercontinental migrants which are likely to get affected if there is a change in the composition of Chilika water and
imbalance in the flow of Mahanadi water into Orissa from Chhattisgarh.
According to the state government’s statement submitted before the Supreme Court, the biodiversity zone of Satkosia Gorge Sanctuary which comprises the natural habitat of two endangered species like Gharial and Mugger are likely to face an unnatural death if the Chhattisgarh Government goes ahead with its planned utilisation of Mahanadi River for its minor and major projects.
At the tripartite meeting between the then Union water resources minister Uma Bharti and Orissa and Chhattisgarh chief ministers, the Orissa Government had told the gathering that a controlled flood release ought to be made in the river basin in Orissa to ensure fish migration and spawning. It also stressed the need for maintaining many natural processes to keep the aquatic environment safe in the Mahanadi delta which covers a coastline of 200km.
Manish Kumar, PNN