← 8 October 2026's Current Affairs · Karnataka KPSC Prelims ★★★☆☆ Mains ★★☆☆☆
Karnataka signals intent to revisit Cauvery water allocation
Why in News?
Karnataka wants Cauvery shares reopened: what the 2018 verdict really changed, a GS2 water-dispute favourite
Karnataka asks for the Cauvery allocation to be revisited as Tamil Nadu reports its lowest realisation in 14 years.
Why it matters: Karnataka-specific
What you need to know
2 min read
In its response, Karnataka has pointed to the Indus Waters Treaty and international practice to say that inter-State water allocations can be revisited by agreement or adjudication when circumstances change.
Tamil Nadu has recorded its lowest Cauvery realisation in 14 years, and paddy coverage in the delta is almost one lakh acres lower than last year.
The Supreme Court's 2018 verdict raised Karnataka's share by 14.75 TMC over the tribunal award, and the Cauvery Water Management Authority was set up that year.
Sources: Topper IAS editorial (PIB / The Hindu / Indian Express)
Key facts
Remember these
- The Supreme Court's 2018 verdict raised Karnataka's Cauvery share by 14.75 TMC over the tribunal award.
- The Cauvery Water Management Authority (CWMA) was set up in 2018 after the Supreme Court verdict.
- Tamil Nadu has recorded its lowest Cauvery realisation in 14 years.
- Paddy coverage in the Cauvery delta is almost one lakh acres lower than last year.
- Karnataka cites the Indus Waters Treaty and international practice to argue allocations can be revisited by agreement or adjudication.
Prelims · Mains
How the exam will ask it
Prelims
- The Supreme Court's 2018 verdict on the Cauvery dispute increased Karnataka's share compared with the tribunal award.
- The Cauvery Water Management Authority was constituted in 2018 following the Supreme Court's verdict.
- Cauvery is an inter-State river dispute involving Karnataka and Tamil Nadu among the riparian States.
Mains
GS2 (Polity and Federalism): Inter-State water disputes arise when shares fixed by tribunals meet changing rainfall and demand. The Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, the 2018 Supreme Court verdict and the CWMA provide the framework, while Karnataka's call to revisit allocations tests the finality of awards. The way forward lies in data-driven distress-sharing formulas, efficient water use and cooperative federal mechanisms rather than repeated litigation.
Quick recall
Answer before you reveal
With reference to the Cauvery river water dispute, consider the following statements:
- The Supreme Court's 2018 verdict reduced Karnataka's share of Cauvery waters compared with the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal award.
- The Cauvery Water Management Authority was constituted in 2018 following the Supreme Court's verdict.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- 1 only
- 2 only
- Both 1 and 2
- Neither 1 nor 2
Show answer
Answer: B — Correct: 2 only — Statement 1 is wrong because the 2018 verdict increased Karnataka's share by 14.75 TMC, while statement 2 is correct. • 1 only — wrong: Statement 1 is wrong, since the 2018 verdict raised Karnataka's share, so '1 only' cannot be right. • Both 1 and 2 — wrong: Statement 1 is wrong, as Karnataka's share was increased by the verdict, so both cannot be correct. • Neither 1 nor 2 — wrong: Statement 2 is correct: the Cauvery Water Management Authority was set up in 2018, so 'neither' is wrong.
Convert this topic into marks
Today's 10-MCQ test · instant analysis · Powered by AdaptIQ