Chennai: Tamil Nadu government had executed all the projects in the Cauvery basin
only with the "approval and sanction" of the Union government and the Planning
Commission, unlike Karnataka which had constructed three dams across Cauvery
river, "in violation of the 1924 agreement", state Public Works Minister, O
Panneerselvam, said on October 8.
Referring to the accusation of Karnataka Water Resources Minister, H K Patil, that
Tamil Nadu had committed a "fraud" on the co-riparian state of Karnataka
by "illegally expanding" its irrigation area over the years, violating the 1924
agreement, he said, in a statement at Chennai, that Tamil Nadu had not violated the
agreement at any point of time and all the projects were executed only with approval
of the Central government and Planning Commission.
Panneerselvam said Patil had "conveniently forgotten" that it was Karnataka which
had violated the agreement by constructing Hemavathi, Herangi and Kabini reservoirs
without the prior consent of the Tamil Nadu government, as provided in the 1892 and
1924 agreements and without the approval of the Union government.
'What locus standi does a state, that has illegally confined a national wealth like
the Cauvery river within its own borders, inflicting ruination and disaster on the
farmers of a neighbouring state, have to speak of the comity of states, principles
and use of dignified language, he asked.
Panneerselvam said "in any case, it would appear that in the Karnataka game plan,
the duties of restraint and use of dignified language are cast upon the lower
riparian state of Tamil Nadu, while the right of upper riparian state is to uphold
interests of only its farmers by repeatedly cocking a snook at Supreme Court's
orders, making a mockery of the Cauvery Regulatory Authority (CRA) and denying
neighbour state its rightful share of water".
Coming down heavily on Karnataka, Panneerselvam said from adding to its own 'ayacut'
(canal) without any mandatory clearance, to flouting the directives of the CRA and
the apex court, every act of Karnataka was "unprincipled and dishonest", he said
adding that "these are the adjectives one can find in the dictionary to describe
the "roguish conduct of Karnataka".
While Jayalalithaa had reasoned with the Tribunal, petitioned the Prime Minister and
pleaded with the CRA and supplicated before the Supreme Court, Karnataka
had "pressured the Prime Minister, stone walled the CRA and defied the apex court",
Panneerselvam said adding that it was for "discerning" public to judge who were the
hardliners and who had complicated the Cauvery issue.
"Is it not a bitter irony that Patil declares that Karnataka will not obey the
Supreme Court's orders in one breath and then goes on to claim in the same breath
that the matter is pending before the Supreme court."
PTI
