A strong attempt is being made at the government level to make it look like Karnataka will not be able to divert Mhadei’s water. The Supreme Court has ordered not to proceed with the Kalsa-Bhandura project without obtaining all the required permits and this is being used as the basis for the aforementioned claim which is extremely false. A stress is laid on Karnataka’s inability to continue the work without the permission of the wildlife conservator.
This is an indirect attempt to reduce the importance of valid points raised by people and opposition as it targets the government. It is indeed true that the difference of opinion over Mhadei has continued to persist.
While everyone is unanimous over the issue in Karnataka, leaders in Goa are still busy playing the blame games. The SC’s hearing on Monday is made to look like a strong slap on Karnataka but in reality, this will only mislead the people of Goa further.
Karnataka has never been the one to take a slap. Karnataka did not hesitate in the slightest to carry out concrete work to divert the water of Kalsa nullah despite mentioning in the affidavit that they will not proceed with any of the work. Karnataka’s lawyers kept insisting that they did not continue with the work only to face backlash from Apex court after Mhadei Bachao Andolan presented the photographs as proof. As a response, Karnataka then started to dramaticise saying a project as big as this where crores of rupees have been spent will go in vain. The Supreme Court then firmly asked Karnataka if they had carried out the work or not to which their lawyer Fali Nariman agreed and assured them not to proceed further in a written affidavit. The Apex court had mentioned this affidavit in the hearing and had stated that the petition is being dismissed by accepting the affidavit.
Karnataka had to face the contempt of court petition and yet, they have not learnt anything from everything that has gone down. The Court appointed officials inspected the construction work at Jamboti, Kankumbi region which was done to divert Kalsa’s water while the matter was pending with Mhadei Water Disputes Tribunal. Karnataka was warned not to carry on with the work and although they were expected to keep the situation as it is, they quietly shifted their focus on Bhandura. They put up stones in the basin of Bhandura in such a way that water would flow backwards in a seemingly natural way. Going even further, they even began their efforts to obtain approval for their Kalsa-Bhandura water management plan from the Ministry of environment, forest and climate change. They included the name of Surla river in this report out of the blue even when it was involved in the original Kalsa-Bhandura controversy.
MWDT distributed the water and there is no mention of Surla river in Karnataka’s share of water. However, Karnatala has cleverly and albeit slyly, included Surla in their DPR which has been made on the basis of Tribunal’s judgement. These attempts should be brought to the notice of the Central government by the Goa government. And if at all Karnataka is taking the water as per the judgement of the Tribunal, then they should withdraw their challenge petition in Supreme Court against the same Tribunal. Karnataka has exposed their duplicity by disagreeing with the Tribunal’s judgement on one hand and on the other, taking the steps to implement judgement of the same Tribunal. It’s clear as day that Karnataka does not obey the law. Even in the past, the neighboring state has not complied with any law while digging canals or felling trees for the Bhandura project. It would be extremely naive to think that Karnataka will follow the law now.
The Government needs to rebut Karnataka in the language that they understand. If the Government stays inattentive thinking that they have the upper hand in the Supreme Court, Karnataka will divert the water and we would not even know. Law is for the ones who follow it and it does not like Karnataka has that intention. It would make no sense to dream of catching Karnataka in the legal dilemma. Karnataka was, is and will be a bully and a lot depends on what strategy will be used for rebuttal.
