Maharashtra's Krishna Water Diversion Proposal Sparks Controversy

Maharashtra's Chief Minister, Devendra Fadnavis, has put forward a contentious proposal to divert 40 thousand million cubic feet (tmc) of Krishna river water to the Bhima basin. This initiative, presented as a floodwater management strategy, aims to transport water from near Mahabaleshwar to the Ujjani reservoir, addressing water scarcity issues in certain regions of Maharashtra. However, the classification of this water as 'floodwater' does not inherently justify its unilateral appropriation by an upstream state, raising concerns about the rights of downstream states.

The Krishna river flows through multiple states, including Maharashtra, Karnataka, Telangana, and Andhra Pradesh, before reaching the Bay of Bengal. It plays a crucial role in supporting irrigation, drinking water supplies, and the livelihoods of millions. Historical allocations made by the first Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal (KWDT-I) in the 1970s allocated 560 tmc to Maharashtra, 700 tmc to Karnataka, and 800 tmc to undivided Andhra Pradesh. Subsequent modifications by the second tribunal in 2013 increased Karnataka's share to 907 tmc, but this revised allocation remains unnotified due to ongoing legal disputes in the Supreme Court.

Fadnavis's proposal is particularly controversial as KWDT-I had previously limited Maharashtra's westward diversion of Krishna waters to 67.5 tmc to ensure a balance between upstream utilization and downstream needs. The introduction of an additional 40 tmc diversion under the guise of floodwater management could undermine this established principle and disrupt the hydrological balance that has been carefully negotiated in previous agreements. The implications for Karnataka are severe, as diminished inflows into the Almatti reservoir could adversely affect irrigation and drinking water supplies in drought-prone districts.

Karnataka's water management plans, including the proposed height increase of the Almatti dam to enhance storage capacity, are at risk if Maharashtra's proposal proceeds unchecked. The project requires scrutiny from the Central Water Commission and environmental clearances due to its location in the ecologically sensitive Western Ghats. In light of these developments, Karnataka is urged to challenge the proposal in the Supreme Court and seek an interim stay pending a thorough examination of its legality and potential downstream impacts.

Karnataka should formally object to the proposal before the tribunal and the central government, demanding access to the detailed project report, hydrological studies, and necessary clearance documents. An independent assessment of the claimed surplus is also essential. Furthermore, Karnataka must advocate for the notification of the modified KWDT-II award to safeguard its water security and uphold the principles of inter-state river water sharing.