Supreme Court Seeks Karnataka Response On Tamil Nadu’s Plea Over Cauvery Water Release Shortfall
Supreme Court seeks Karnataka response on Tamil Nadu’s plea over Cauvery water release deficit
The Supreme Court on Thursday directed Karnataka and other respondents to file their response within a week to Tamil Nadu’s plea alleging that the State was not making good the deficit in Cauvery water releases despite directions issued by the Cauvery Water Management Authority (CWMA) and the Cauvery Water Regulation Committee (CWRC).
The Bench of Justices Vikram Nath, AG Masih and Sandeep Mehta directed that the matter be listed again on October 12 and clarified that the existing arrangement and directions would continue in the meantime.
Senior Advocate C S Vaidyanathan, appearing for Tamil Nadu, submitted that the State was only seeking enforcement of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal award and proportional release of water during a distress year.
“All we are seeking is enforcement of the award,” Vaidyanathan submitted.
Tamil Nadu relied on Clause 7 of the final award, submitting that when the yield of the Cauvery basin is lower in a distress year, the allocated shares are required to be proportionately reduced.
Tamil Nadu further referred to the CWRC’s assessment, which records a 50.5% deficit in cumulative net flows received in Karnataka’s four designated reservoirs during the relevant period.
According to Tamil Nadu, although the CWRC recorded the deficit, its subsequent directions reduced the required release but did not explain how the accumulated shortfall was to be made good.
Tamil Nadu also submitted that the CWMA had taken note of the deficit and the submissions of both States but, according to the State, had not addressed the question of making good the accumulated shortfall.
Tamil Nadu claimed that Karnataka had realised substantial quantities of water in its reservoirs while Tamil Nadu had received less than its proportional entitlement.
According to Tamil Nadu’s calculations, the shortfall was around 20 TMC, whereas Karnataka’s assessment was stated to put the figure at around 16 TMC.
Tamil Nadu further submitted that with the monsoon receding, the window to make good the deficit was narrowing. It also alleged that Karnataka had substantially reduced reservoir storage during the summer for a summer crop, which, according to Tamil Nadu, contributed to the present situation.
Karnataka disputed the allegations.
Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for Karnataka, termed Tamil Nadu’s allegations “absolutely baseless” and submitted that factual assertions should not be made without an affidavit.
Karnataka told the Supreme Court that it was facing a severe drought situation but had nevertheless continued releasing water in compliance with CWMA directions. It further submitted that on several occasions, the releases had exceeded the quantities directed by the CWMA despite the difficult conditions.
Divan referred the Bench to an updated chart showing Karnataka’s releases over the preceding 15 days. He pointed out that while there had been days of deficit, there had also been days when releases were in surplus.
Karnataka also submitted that the Court had so far not formally required it to file a reply to the present application, although it had filed replies on earlier occasions without formal notice.
After hearing the parties, the Supreme Court directed the respondents to file their response to the writ petition within one week.
“Let the response be filed by the respondents within a week. List again on October 12,” the Bench directed.
The Court also clarified that the existing arrangement and directions would continue in the meantime.
The hearing thereafter concluded with the matter being listed for October 12.
Background
Notably, Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) had moved the Supreme Court seeking urgent release of Cauvery River water by Karnataka to Tamil Nadu in compliance with the recent directions of the Cauvery Water Management Authority which recently upheld the direction of the Cauvery Water Regulation Committee to release 3500 cusecs per day to Tamil Nadu, for 15 days.
The Cauvery water dispute is a long-standing dispute between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu which started way back in 1974 when Karnataka, the upper riparian State, started diverting water without Tamil Nadu's consent.
DMK has claimed that as per the final order of the Tribunal, the monthly stipulated flows to be ensured by Karnataka at Biligundlu during June to January every year are as follows: June to September - 123.14 TMC, October to January - 44.11 TMC, June to January - 167.25 TMC.
The application further highlights that in the current water year, the South-West Monsoon has been deficient in the Cauvery basin. It is alleged that the flows realized at Biligundlu have been dismally low - only about 10% of what is stipulated for the period. According to the applicant's estimate (accounting for distress-sharing basis), the backlog due to Tamil Nadu at Biligundlu stood at 9.46 TMC on July 26 (to fulfill which requirement about 7000 cusecs per day must be released for 15 days).
DMK submits that despite the decisions of the statutory authorities, Karnataka has not released the water. On the contrary, the state representatives have been reported as saying that the state will not release the water. The application underlines the significance of the current period by highlighting that out of the annual quantum of 167.25 TMC, nearly 3/4th is required to be realized at Biligundlu between June-September, as this is the time when the Kuruvai paddy crop is raised and operations for the Samba crop are undertaken.
Last year, Supreme Court had also refused to interfere with the Mekedatu Reservoir Project proposed by the Karnataka government in Cauvery river against which a plea was made by State of Tamil Nadu against the balancing reservoir at Mekedatu in Kanakapura Taluk of Bengaluru South District on the Karnataka-Tamil Nadu border.
Earlier, Union government had clarified that it has not accorded “any approval" for the construction of new dams across the Cauvery river. In a written reply to a question in the Rajya Sabha, Raj Bhushan Choudhary, minister of state for Jal Shakti, had said no permission was given for a new dam.
Notably, in 2023 the Supreme Court had also refused to interfere with the Cauvery Water Management Authority (CWMA) order on directions to the State of Karnataka on releasing Cauvery water to Tamil Nadu. A bench comprising Justices BR Gavai, PS Narasimha and Prashant Kumar Mishra had opined that the CWMA and CMRC consisted of various experts in the field of water resource management they had taken into consideration the shortfall of water this year before passing said order.
Case Title: State of Tamil Nadu v. State of Karnataka
Bench: Justices Vikram Nath, AG Masih and Sandeep Mehta
Hearing Date: September 24, 2026