What is Cauvery dispute? Here's your 5-point guide to biggest water war in India

The Supreme Court today gave its landmark verdict in Cauvery water dispute, in which Karnataka has been awarded bigger share of water, whereas Tamil Nadu's share has been reduced. However, Kerala's share remain unchanged. 

The apex court directed the Karnataka government to release 177.25 tmcft of Cauvery water to Tamil Nadu from its inter-state Biligundlu dam.

The judgment clarified that Karnataka will now have an enhanced share of 14.75 tmcft water per year while Tamil Nadu will get 404.25 tmcft, which will be 14.75 tmcft less than what was allotted by the tribunal in 2007.

Here is the 5-point guide on the decade-long Cauvery water dispute: 

1. The Cauvery, originating in Karnataka and flowing into Tamil Nadu, has been the source of a bitter dispute since 1892 as farmers in both states depend on the almost 765km-long river for sustenance.

2. According to the 1924 agreement, Tamil Nadu and Puducherry would get 75 per cent of the surplus water, while Karnataka would get 23 per cent. The remaining would go to Kerala. The agreement also spelled out restrictions on how much land would be irrigated.

3. Post-Independence, the issue was raised again when the state borders were reorganized in 1956. While Karnataka has challenged this treaty demanding threefold of its current share, Tamil Nadu, which is dependent on the water from the Cauvery, has opposed the dams Karnataka constructed on the river.

4. The Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (CWDT) calculated the water inflow to Tamil Nadu between 1980 and 1990. In 1991, the tribunal passed an interim order directing Karnataka to ensure that Tamil Nadu received 205 tmcft of water per annum.

5. In 2007, the Tribunal gave its award to divide the water between four states. Around 419 tmc ft of Cauvery water to Tamil Nadu, 270 tmc ft to Karnataka, 30 tmc ft to Kerala and 7 tmc ft to Puducherry were to be distributed. This led to high-end protests from Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Kerala against the tribunal's decision in Supreme Court and filed review petition as none of them were happier with the order.