It was decided at the meeting that the member states would submit their recommendations vis--vis the structure of the scheme, functions of its members and responsibilities. The scheme has to be in place within six weeks from February 16, when the apex court had pronounced its verdict, that is, by this month-end.
The meeting was chaired by Water Resources Ministry Secretary UP Singh. The chief secretaries of the three states and Puducherry and other senior officials of the ministry were also present at the meeting.
The Supreme Court had, on February 16, increased the 270 thousand million cubic feet (tmcft) share of Cauvery water for Karnataka by 14.75 tmcft and reduced Tamil Nadu's share, while compensating the latter by allowing extraction of 10 tmcft groundwater from the river basin, saying the issue of drinking water had to be placed on a "higher pedestal".
More From This Section
The Cauvery Water Dispute Tribunal (CWDT) award of February 5, 2007 (notified in the gazette on February 19, 2013) had allocated 419 tmcft , 270 tmcft, 30 tmcft and 7 tmcft of water annually to Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala and Puducherry respectively.
The meeting was called for consultationwe wanted to know the views of the four states. Since the scheme has to be formulated, what should be the exact shape, composition, roles and responsibilities of the body that will be set up under it, Singh told reporters after the meeting.
To a question on whether the composition of the scheme would be on the line of what the CWDT had recommended, Singh said it was a matter of interpretation.
The tribunal had, in the 2007 award, recommended setting up a board with a chairman, who would be an officer of the chief engineer's rank (with 20 years of experience). The tribinal had said there would be two members (chief engineers with 15 years of experience each) -- one from the agriculture department and the other from the water resources department -- and a board secretary.
and the Supreme Court has (in its order) not used the words Cauvery Management Board, it is basically saying a scheme'. It (the scheme) could be exactly what the tribunal had said, Singh said.
He added that the meeting also discussed if an official, senior than the rank of a chief engineer, should be appointed as the chairman of the scheme for its better implementation.
On the issue of allocation of functions with regard to the physical assets, regulation and release of water, a source in the ministry said, The sentiment among the members was that the dams will remain with the respective states, while regulation and release of water will be with the body (scheme) to be formed.
Singh cited two models of the Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB) and the Narmada Control Authority (NCA). The BBMB is engaged in regulation of water and power supply from the Bhakra Nangal and Beas projects to Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan, Himachal Pardesh, Delhi and Chandigarh. On the other hand, formed in December 1980, the NCA is a body with representatives from Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and the Centre.
Speaking to reporters after the meeting, Karnataka Chief Secretary Ratna Prabha said the unanimous decision taken at the meeting was that there should be a scheme.
According to sources in the Karnataka government, the state is expected to send its recommendations with regard to the scheme by Monday or Tuesday.