A Dam Two States Cannot Agree On: Mekedatu and the Limits of Cauvery Water-Sharing
UPSC-standard MCQs with explanations, trap analysis, and approach guide. Answer after the test — not before.
1
Easy
1
Medium
1
Hard
Practice this set
3 questions · full analysis after submission · no sign-up required
Article summary
The long-running dispute over the proposed Mekedatu balancing reservoir and drinking-water project returned to prominence as legal and legislative manoeuvres in Tamil Nadu — including an amended Assembly resolution opposing the project and a related writ petition before the Madras High Court — underscored the state's continued objection to Karnataka's plan. Mekedatu is a site on the Cauvery river in Karnataka, near the Karnataka-Tamil Nadu border, where Karnataka proposes a reservoir to supply drinking water to Bengaluru and generate power. Tamil Nadu, the lower riparian state, opposes it, fearing the reservoir would let Karnataka regulate flows and reduce the water reaching Tamil Nadu's delta farmers. The dispute sits within the wider Cauvery water-sharing conflict, one of India's oldest inter-state river disputes, governed by the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956 and adjudicated by a tribunal whose award the Supreme Court modified in 2018, with a Cauvery Water Management Authority overseeing implementation.
What this tests
Sample questions — answers revealed after test
Q1. Which of the following correctly describes the course of the Cauvery (Kaveri) river?
Q2. Why does the article describe an upstream State's dam project as inherently threatening to the downstream State on a shared river?
Q3. Consider the following statements about inter-state river water disputes in India: 1. Water is a State subject, but the regulation of inter-state rivers falls within the Union's competence, and Parliament can provide for the adjudication of such disputes. 2. Inter-state river water disputes referred to a tribunal are, by a constitutional provision, kept outside the ordinary jurisdiction of the courts. 3. Because a tribunal has issued a final award on the Cauvery, no further litigation or inter-state friction over specific projects is possible. Which of the statements given above are correct?