The recent judgement is Cauvery water dispute had increased allocation to Karnataka. It had following aspect
-It has reduced share to TN n increased of Karnataka based on ground water and drinking supply to Bangalore.
-No single State has primacy in accessing water resources and that rivers are national assets.
-Centre should get down to creating a legal and technical framework to implement the Tribunal’s award.
SIGNIFICANCE
-it gives new criteria as right should be equally and reasonably shared by all States concerned.
-It rejected equal sharing of water.
-In future courts will decide disputes based on Helsinki Rules of 1966, which recognise equitable use of water by each basin State taking into consideration the geography and hydrology of the basin, the climate, past utilisation of waters, economic and social needs, dependent population and availability of resources.
IMPLICATIONS
-TN will not accept verdict and file curative petition.
-It may reopen awards in other river dispute matters.
-Government can take river linking project as now river water nation property.
CONCLUSION:As SC had told no state owns a river, it is imperative that fight over sharing water should be stopped and all states along with central should work on judicious use and conservation of water Like interlinking of rivers etc.
