SC rejects TN’s plea as ‘premature’

The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected the Tamil Nadu government’s plea objecting to the proposed Mekedatu dam project on the Cauvery river by the Karnataka government, holding that the challenge to the preparatory process was “premature”.

A bench consisting Chief Justice of India Bhushan R Gavai and justices K Vinod Chandran and NV Anjaria, in response to the Tamil Nadu government’s contention that the proposed project violated the final decisions of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (2007) and the Supreme Court (2018), noted that the draft pre-feasibility report (DPR) for the project was currently under consideration of the Central Water Commission (CWC), itself answerable to the Cauvery Water Regulation Committee (CWRC) and the Cauvery Water Management Authority (CWMA). “At this stage, what is being done by the order passed by the CWC is only the preparation of the DPR, that too after taking into consideration the objections of the State of Tamil Nadu and the experts of CWMA and CWRC,” said the bench.

Noting that prior approval by the authorities mentioned was directed by the CWC as a prerequisite for the DPR’s consideration, the bench termed the “present application to be premature”.

The bench also recalled its August 25, 2023 order, in which it declined to interfere in the Cauvery water release issue, citing lack of technical expertise, leaving the assessment of rainfall and storage conditions to CWMA.

“When the expert body is seized of the matter, the present application is premature… This, today is premature. There doesn’t seem to be a reason why you should have any apprehension that the central government or CWC would be taking sides in this matter,” the bench told senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi, who appeared for the Tamil Nadu government.

The bench further clarified that Tamil Nadu would be free to pursue appropriate legal remedies if and when the DPR receives approval from CWC.

In its order, the bench also recalled its previous orders on the matter. “If Karnataka fails to comply with the directions of this court, it faces the risk of committing contempt… further, it is the duty of CWMA to ensure the decree of the court about the apportioning of water is complied with,” the bench said.