“MAHA” DISPUTE OVER MAHANADI

INTRODUCTION

This paper focus on the dispute over river Mahanadi which rises in a pool 6 km from Farsiya
village in Chhattisgarh’s Dhamtari district, and winds 851 km broadly east to fall into the Bay
of Bengal close to the temple town of Konark in Odisha’s Puri district. The river basin is spread
over Chhattisgarh, Odisha, and small parts of Jharkhand, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh,
and drains an area of 1,41,589 square km, with a maximum length of 587 km and a maximum
width of 400 km. Some 54.27% of the basin area is agricultural land, and 4.45% is water bodies,
according to the National Water Development Agency, an autonomous society under the
Ministry of Water Resources, which studies the river systems of peninsular India.

The construction of dams and bar-rages in the upper catchment area of the Mahanadi River
gives rise to the looming fear that the flow of water into the Hirakud dam will slow down and,
consequently, a massive spat between the states of Odisha and Chhattisgarh will ensue, with
all its political overtones. The ecological balance of the river has been gravely affected by the
rapid industrialisation undertaken by both states. On the one hand, the Mahanadi is the means
of survival for the people of Odisha. The government will not be able to cater to the
developmental needs of the state if the fl ow of water decreases. On the other hand,
Chhattisgarh, which speeded up its developmental work after its separation from Madhya
Pradesh (MP), has a huge water requirement. Both states are now at loggerheads oever their
right to the Mahanadi water.

PRESENT STATE OF THE RIVER

Mahanadi, which was once considered a water surplus river, is dying. A scientific analysis by
a team of researchers from the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Madras and IIT Bombay
showed that the Mahanadi’s water yield has decreased by 10% in recent years, owing to a
significant decrease in rainfall over the basin (Ghosh et al 2016). While the river’s water yield
is steadily diminishing, the allocation of water to industrial houses and urban centre is
increasing. With gal-loping industrialisation, commercialisation, and urbanisation in the river
basin, disputes over river water are also in-creasing. Farmers, fisherfolk, and the common
people have been fighting for their right to use the Mahanadi water. The river is now seriously
polluted, and the current blind push for thermal power plants is worsening the plight of the
river. The unregulated extraction of water from the HIRAKUD DAM by certain industries has
validated farmers’ fears; farmers’ organisations are spearheading a growing and vocal
movement against the supply of dam water to industries. Forest degradation, mining,
industrialisation, and the recent construction of a coal fired power plant in the basin have been
affecting not only the flow of water and the health of the basin, but have also further exposed
it to the impact of climate change.

HIRAKUD RESERVOIR AT THE CENTRE

At the heart of the dispute over Mahanadi water lies the huge Hirakud dam and reservoir.
Odisha's allegation of reduced flow to the Hirakud reservoir from Chhattisgarh triggered the
dispute. The Hirakud dam project has multiple and conflicting objectives. Its main role is to
moderate floods in the Mahanadi and hence, it has to remain empty for most of the monsoon
season to be ready to accommodate excess water in times of need. The reservoir has many
competing users. It has a large direct irrigation command in the western parts of Odisha and a
big indirect irrigation command in the deltaic areas in eastern parts of the state. It is one of the
important generators of hydro-power in Odisha, a large supplier of water to industrial and urban
demands, and also has the objective to ensure flow in the Mahanadi to meet drinking water,
ecological and other needs.
 Fig: Representation of Hirakud Dam

CHHATTISGARH CONCERN

Chhattisgarh’s industries have started asserting that the place of the Mahanadi’s origin should
enjoy maximum utilisation of its water. The Chhattisgarh government has assured the Odisha
government that the construction of irrigation projects on its side will pose no danger to the
Hirakud dam. The chief minister of Chhattisgarh pointed out that his state has been utilising its
legitimate share of water without affecting the interests of neighbouring Odisha, and that it
respected the Interstate River Water Sharing Agreement. He added that about 54% of the
geographical area of the state is drained through the Mahanadi, which is the “lifeline” of
Chhattisgarh (Times of India 2016). Chhattisgarh is host to 86% of the water in the Mahanadi
up to the Hirakud dam, but it utilises only 25% of the water. The state government built 13
barrages across the Mahanadi River. Water Resource minister, Agrawal added that the projects
aimed at ensuring a steady water supply to industries and irrigation. All these projects have the
potential to irrigate less than 2,000 hectares and fall under the category of minor irrigation
projects; thus, they do not require approval from the Central Water Commission (CWC) (Das
2016).

ODISHA CONCERN

Odisha is arguing that Chhattisgarh has been constructing dams and weirs (small dams)
upstream the Mahanadi River. This is being allegedly carried on by the Chhattisgarh
government without consulting Odisha. Odisha says this would affect the flow of the river
downstream and affect drinking water supply. Also, it would impact the irrigation facilities in
Odisha and adversely affect the interests of the farmers. It is also alleged that Chhattisgarh
would utilise water far in excess of the equitable share of the waters of Mahanadi. Moreover,
the weirs and other projects would impact the flow of water in the Hirakud reservoir, a
multipurpose river valley project, which is a lifeline for many in the state.

The Mahanadi is Odisha’s “lifeline,” as 65% of the state’s population depends on it. The
Mahanadi’s water is like the life-blood of the Odiyas, and Odiyas tend to believe the
Chhattisgarh government will be cutting off this lifeline by building barrages on the upper
catchment area of the river, thereby endangering the lives and livelihoods of millions of
farmers. They believe that the CWC has remained silent on the issue. No single state should
enjoy absolute rights over the water of rivers passing through several provinces, as it is against
the federal spirit of India. The Chhattisgarh government has been supplying water from the
controversial Kelo dam to industries in-stead of using it for drinking and irrigation purposes.
Such constructions adversely affect the interests of farmers. The seven weirs and other projects
will negatively impact the flow of water into the Hirakud reservoir. According to the Odisha
government, the Chhattisgarh government’ s construction of dams is a violation of the cardinal
doctrine of interstate river water sharing between co-basin states and federal governance

Utilization projection by Odisha VS current run-off

Direct annual utilization projection from Hirakud

14.73

Total utilization projectiopn at Hirakud, including

environmental flow need 22.53

Admitted current inflow at Hirakud

17.3

0 5 10 15 20 25
Percentage

DISPUTE TIMELINE

The Chhattisgarh government, in its reply to Odisha’s plea in the Supreme Court for an
injunction to stop work on six industrial barrages upstream on the Mahanadi, provided the
following timeline.

➢ In 1983, the Chief Ministers of Odisha and undivided Madhya Pradesh agreed
to resolve “all water disputes by a mechanism of Joint Control Board” to “review the
progress, from time to time of survey, investigation, planning, execution and
preparation of joint inter-state irrigation and power projects” and to “discuss and
resolve any issues.”

In 2000, Chhattisgarh was created.

➢ In November 2016, Odisha filed a complaint in the Supreme Court, and in the
following month a suit under Article 131 of the Constitution (disputes between states
 and the Union, or among states) to plead for the setting up of a Tribunal under Section
3 of the Inter-state Water Disputes Act, 1956.
➢ In its reply in December 2016, Chhattisgarh asked Odisha to form the “Joint
Control Board” proposed by the 1983 agreement.
➢ In January 2017, the Centre formed an 11-member negotiation committee to
resolve the dispute. Odisha insisted on the Tribunal instead, and stayed away as the
committee met in February 2017. The committee held a meeting again later that year.
Meanwhile, the Union government’s statement in Parliament to set up a tribunal was
overturned with Minister of Water Resources Nitin Gadkari’s proposal to form a joint
control board for “early resolution of the issue.”
➢ However, on January 23, 2018, the apex court directed the Centre to notify a
Tribunal to adjudicate the dispute. The Tribunal, which the Centre notified on March
12, has been asked to “determine water sharing among basin states on the basis of the
overall availability of water, contribution of each state, the present utilisation of water
resources in each state and the potential for future development”.

WHAT IS LACKING?

➢ The absence of a proper river policy could spark a dispute between Chhattisgarh and
Odisha, as both states are in the process of signing memoranda of understanding with
industries regarding the utilisation of river water, which poses a threat to the very
existence of the river. The river is at the fore-front of a crisis in these states.
➢ The absence of an agreement between the two states on the utilisation of water and no
scientific basis of water allocation and actual estimation of its availability and the
involvement and livelihood of dependent communities living on the banks of the river
may escalate the magnitude of the dispute.
➢ Both governments are conducting water flow and balance analyses based on old and
fragmented data in order to privatise river water. Information gaps in submissions on
both sides further exacerbate the issue.
➢ The provisions of the Interstate Water Disputes Act, 1956, are insufficient to address
the disputes and ensure cooperation. To resolve the issue harmoniously, a key set of
data should be available to both the states; this is currently lacking.
➢ The ecological needs of the riverine system, apart from its economic and livelihood
uses, are being completely overlooked. It is practically impossible to determine the
scale of obstruction that would not harm the Hirakud dam and the fl ow downstream
References

➢ https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324531121_Resolving_the_Mahanadi_
Water_Conflict_Need_for_A_Well_Rounded_Strategy
➢ https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/water/-maha-dispute-over-the-mahanadi-
60542
➢ https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/in-odisha-vs-chhattisgarh-mahanadi-
water-wars-issues-of-dams-politics/
➢ https://empowerias.com/blog/prelims-special-facts/mahanadi-water-disputes-
tribunal
➢ https://www.iasparliament.com/article/mahanadi-river-water-dispute