<div align="justify">Karnataka on Tuesday criticised the Cauvery Water Dispute Tribunal’s decision for releasing water to Tamil Nadu every month, saying “it is like God sending rain to the state”.<br /><br />Calling the Tribunal's direction of 2007 as “arbitrary” for ignoring the needs of Karnataka, senior advocate F S Nariman, appearing for Karnataka, submitted before a three-judge bench presided over by Justice Dipak Misra that it was perverse for the Tribunal to have fixed monthly water releases to Tamil Nadu without any regard to the availability of water. “How can the Tribunal fix the quantity of water to be released?” he questioned. Nariman, made the intervention, during the arguments being advanced by advocate Mohan Katarki.<br /><br />The state contended that the Tribunal did not consider the due need of two-thirds of Bengaluru, holding that the city fell outside the basin and was not entitled to supply water from Cauvery. The Tribunal granted only 1.85 tmcft to Karnataka and 2.73 tmfct to Tamil Nadu for consumptive use.<br /><br />Katarki, submitted before the bench, also comprising Justices Amitava Roy and A M Khanwilkar, that the Tribunal went on to consider the population of each state to allocate water. <br /><br />“The population in Tamil Nadu far exceeded the population in Karnataka, which enabled the Tribunal to allocate to Tamil Nadu 25.7 tmcft unconnected to any projects. This 25.7 tmcft water was neither claimed nor pleaded by Tamil Nadu, yet it was allocated the share,” he said.<br /><br />Katarki said the Tribunal’s order to Karnataka to supply 192 tmcft annually at the inter-state border of Billigundlu was fixed without any regard to 30 tmcft groundwater available in Tamil Nadu.<br /><br /><br /></div>
<div align="justify">Karnataka on Tuesday criticised the Cauvery Water Dispute Tribunal’s decision for releasing water to Tamil Nadu every month, saying “it is like God sending rain to the state”.<br /><br />Calling the Tribunal's direction of 2007 as “arbitrary” for ignoring the needs of Karnataka, senior advocate F S Nariman, appearing for Karnataka, submitted before a three-judge bench presided over by Justice Dipak Misra that it was perverse for the Tribunal to have fixed monthly water releases to Tamil Nadu without any regard to the availability of water. “How can the Tribunal fix the quantity of water to be released?” he questioned. Nariman, made the intervention, during the arguments being advanced by advocate Mohan Katarki.<br /><br />The state contended that the Tribunal did not consider the due need of two-thirds of Bengaluru, holding that the city fell outside the basin and was not entitled to supply water from Cauvery. The Tribunal granted only 1.85 tmcft to Karnataka and 2.73 tmfct to Tamil Nadu for consumptive use.<br /><br />Katarki, submitted before the bench, also comprising Justices Amitava Roy and A M Khanwilkar, that the Tribunal went on to consider the population of each state to allocate water. <br /><br />“The population in Tamil Nadu far exceeded the population in Karnataka, which enabled the Tribunal to allocate to Tamil Nadu 25.7 tmcft unconnected to any projects. This 25.7 tmcft water was neither claimed nor pleaded by Tamil Nadu, yet it was allocated the share,” he said.<br /><br />Katarki said the Tribunal’s order to Karnataka to supply 192 tmcft annually at the inter-state border of Billigundlu was fixed without any regard to 30 tmcft groundwater available in Tamil Nadu.<br /><br /><br /></div>