Tamil Nadu CM Vijay Urges PM Modi to Stop Mekedatu Project, Seeks Cauvery Water Rights Protection
Tamil Nadu CM Vijay Mekedatu Project: Tamil Nadu Chief Minister C. Joseph Vijay has written to Prime Minister Narendra Modi urging the Union Government to safeguard the rights of lower riparian states in the long-pending Mekedatu project dispute. In his detailed letter, Vijay requested the Centre to ensure that no approval is granted to Karnataka’s proposed Mekedatu balancing reservoir project unless it fully complies with the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (CWDT) Award and the Supreme Court’s 2018 judgment on the Cauvery water-sharing dispute.
Tamil Nadu CM Vijay Mekedatu Project has become a major political and legal issue once again after the Chief Minister objected to a recent reply given by the Union Minister of State for Jal Shakti in the Rajya Sabha. Vijay described the Centre’s response as “disappointing” and argued that it overlooked established legal principles regarding the consent of lower riparian states before any major construction across an inter-state river.
Tamil Nadu CM Vijay Writes to PM Modi Over Mekedatu Project
In his letter, Vijay expressed concern over the Union Government’s interpretation of the Supreme Court’s February 16, 2018 judgment. The Rajya Sabha reply had stated that the judgment does not expressly require Karnataka to obtain the consent of downstream states before constructing a structure across the Cauvery River.
Rejecting this interpretation, Vijay said the legal position cannot be viewed in isolation. According to him, the rights of lower riparian states have been consistently protected through constitutional principles, judicial precedents and the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal Award.
He urged Prime Minister Narendra Modi to personally intervene and ensure that the interests of Tamil Nadu and other downstream states are not compromised while considering Karnataka’s proposal.
Chief Minister Cites Supreme Court Judgment
To strengthen Tamil Nadu’s position, Vijay referred to the Constitution Bench judgment in the State of Karnataka vs State of Andhra Pradesh case relating to the Alamatti Dam project. He argued that the Supreme Court had made it clear that an upper riparian state cannot undertake projects affecting downstream states without obtaining their consent.
According to the Chief Minister, this judicial principle remains relevant while examining the Mekedatu proposal because the project has the potential to influence the regulated flow of Cauvery River water into Tamil Nadu.
CWDT Award Must Be Followed Strictly
Vijay also highlighted the importance of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal Award, stating that the Supreme Court had already upheld its core provisions in the 2018 verdict. He referred to Clause XVIII of the Tribunal Award, which allows each state to regulate water within its own territory only in a manner consistent with the Tribunal’s directions.
According to the Chief Minister, any reservoir or balancing project that could alter the scheduled release of Cauvery water must first be examined to determine whether it complies with the Tribunal Award before receiving any statutory or administrative approval.
Reference to Kerala’s Pambar Hydro-electric Project
Vijay further pointed to the Tribunal’s observations regarding Kerala’s Pambar Hydro-electric Project. Although that project involved only around 0.1 TMC of consumptive water use, the Tribunal still directed Kerala and Tamil Nadu to jointly determine water release schedules to ensure that downstream irrigation was not affected.
He argued that this clearly demonstrates that the Tribunal attached equal importance to the timing and regulation of water releases, not merely the annual quantity allocated to each state. Therefore, any project affecting Cauvery flows should undergo a comprehensive legal and technical review before approval.
Clause XI and Clause XX of the CWDT Award Explained
Mekedatu Project Cauvery Water Dispute was further discussed in the Chief Minister’s letter through references to Clause XI and Clause XX of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (CWDT) Award. Vijay stated that Clause XI prevents an upper riparian state from taking any action that affects the scheduled release of water to downstream states unless there is mutual agreement and consultation with the designated regulatory authority.
He also highlighted Clause XX, which provides that any modification to the Tribunal Award can only be made through an agreement among all party states. According to Vijay, these provisions clearly indicate that Karnataka cannot proceed with a project that may alter the regulated flow of Cauvery waters without following the legal framework established under the Tribunal Award.
Mekedatu Project Cannot Be Treated as Only an Engineering Proposal
The Tamil Nadu Chief Minister argued that the proposed Mekedatu balancing reservoir should not be examined merely from an engineering or infrastructure perspective. Instead, he said the project must first undergo a detailed legal and constitutional examination to determine whether it complies with the CWDT Award and the Supreme Court’s February 16, 2018 judgment.
Vijay stressed that the rights of downstream states extend beyond annual water allocation and also include the regulated pattern and timing of water releases, which are critical for irrigation, drinking water supply and agricultural planning in Tamil Nadu.
Detailed Project Report Returned Earlier
Referring to the history of the proposal, Vijay noted that Karnataka had submitted the Detailed Project Report (DPR) for the Mekedatu project to the Central Water Commission (CWC) in 2019. However, the report was returned for revision so that it could be aligned with the provisions of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal Award and other applicable technical guidelines.
According to the Chief Minister, this itself demonstrates that compliance with the Tribunal Award remains an essential requirement before any further statutory or administrative approval can be considered.
Vijay Seeks Withdrawal of Centre’s Rajya Sabha Reply
In his letter, Vijay requested the Union Government to withdraw the reply given by the Minister of State for Jal Shakti in the Rajya Sabha. He argued that the statement did not correctly reflect the prevailing legal position regarding the rights of lower riparian states and could create unnecessary confusion over the interpretation of the Supreme Court judgment.
He further urged the Centre to ensure that no approval is granted to the Mekedatu project unless it is demonstrably consistent with the CWDT Award, the Supreme Court verdict and all applicable legal provisions governing inter-state river water disputes.
Protect Rights of Lower Riparian States, Says CM Vijay
Vijay also appealed to the Prime Minister to safeguard the interests of all lower riparian states in terms of both water quantity and the regulated schedule of releases. He said any future decision on the Mekedatu project should be taken only after a comprehensive technical, environmental and legal assessment while considering the concerns raised by downstream states.
Calling the Cauvery River the lifeline of millions of farmers and citizens across southern India, the Chief Minister said preserving the integrity of the Tribunal Award and the Supreme Court judgment is essential for maintaining trust in India’s constitutional mechanism for resolving inter-state river disputes.
Centre Asked to Ensure Federal Harmony
Concluding his letter, Vijay requested Prime Minister Narendra Modi to intervene in the matter in the larger interest of justice, cooperative federalism and faithful implementation of judicial decisions. He said protecting the legal rights of lower riparian states is vital for ensuring long-term harmony among states sharing the Cauvery River basin.
The Mekedatu project has remained one of the most sensitive inter-state water issues involving Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. With the latest communication from the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister, the debate over the project’s legal validity and its potential impact on downstream water availability is expected to remain a significant political and policy issue in the coming months.
