You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reasons:

This IP address has been blocked from editing Wikipedia.
This does not affect your ability to read Wikipedia pages.
Most people who see this message have done nothing wrong. Some kinds of blocks restrict editing from specific service providers or telecom companies in response to recent abuse or vandalism, and can sometimes affect other users who are unrelated to that abuse. Review the information below for assistance if you do not believe that you have done anything wrong.

The IP address or range 54.174.0.0/16 has been blocked (disabled) by ‪JJMC89‬ for the following reason(s):

The IP address that you are currently using has been blocked because it is believed to be a web host provider or colocation provider. To prevent abuse, web hosts and colocation providers may be blocked from editing Wikipedia.
You will not be able to edit Wikipedia using a web host or colocation provider because it hides your IP address, much like a proxy or VPN.
We recommend that you attempt to use another connection to edit. For example, if you use a proxy or VPN to connect to the internet, turn it off when editing Wikipedia. If you edit using a mobile connection, try using a Wi-Fi connection, and vice versa. If you are using a corporate internet connection, switch to a different Wi-Fi network. If you have a Wikipedia account, please log in.
If you do not have any other way to edit Wikipedia, you will need to request an IP block exemption.

How to appeal if you are confident that your connection does not use a colocation provider's IP address:
If you are confident that you are not using a web host, you may appeal this block by adding the following text on your talk page: ((unblock|reason=Caught by a colocation web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. My IP address is _______. Place any further information here. ~~~~)). You must fill in the blank with your IP address for this block to be investigated. Your IP address can be determined here. Alternatively, if you wish to keep your IP address private you can use the unblock ticket request system. There are several reasons you might be editing using the IP address of a web host or colocation provider (such as if you are using VPN software or a business network); please use this method of appeal only if you think your IP address is in fact not a web host or colocation provider.

Administrators: The IP block exemption user right should only be applied to allow users to edit using web host in exceptional circumstances, and requests should usually be directed to the functionaries team via email. If you intend to give the IPBE user right, a CheckUser needs to take a look at the account. This can be requested most easily at SPI Quick Checkuser Requests. Unblocking an IP or IP range with this template is highly discouraged without at least contacting the blocking administrator.

This block will expire on 05:35, 2 May 2025.

Even when blocked, you will usually still be able to edit your user talk page, as well as email administrators and other editors.

For information on how to proceed, please read the FAQ for blocked users and the guideline on block appeals. The guide to appealing blocks may also be helpful.

Other useful links: Blocking policy · Help:I have been blocked
Your IP address is in a range that has been blocked on all Wikimedia Foundation wikis. The block was made by ‪Jon Kolbert‬. The reason given is Open proxy/Webhost: See the help page if you are affected .
- Start of block: 18:27, 12 November 2023
- Expiry of block: 18:27, 12 November 2028
Your current IP address is 54.174.96.79. The blocked range is 54.174.0.0/16. Please include all above details in any queries you make. If you believe you were blocked by mistake, you can find additional information and instructions in the No open proxies global policy. Otherwise, to discuss the block please post a request for review on Meta-Wiki. You could also send an email to the stewards VRT queue at stewards@wikimedia.org including all above details.

You can view and copy the source of this page:

((Use dmy dates|date=August 2019))
((Use Indian English|date=August 2019))
((More citations needed|date=December 2011))
[[File:Mullapperiyardam.jpg|thumb|Mullaperiyar Dam]]

((Cleanup rewrite|Reason for rewrite|article or section|date=April 2017))
'''Tamil Nadu-Kerala dam row''' (alternatively '''India dam row''') is an ongoing row and the long legal battle between the [[India]]n states of [[Tamil Nadu]] and [[Kerala]] about the [[Mullaperiyar Dam]] on the [[Periyar river]]. Although the 127-year-old Mullaperiyar dam is located in Kerala, it is operated by the government of Tamil Nadu which signed a 999-year lease agreement with the former British government to irrigate farmland on its side. The agreement was signed by the Secretary of [[Madras State]] (now Tamil Nadu) under the British Raj and the King of [[Travancore]].<ref>((cite news | url=https://www.ndtv.com/kerala-news/the-mullaperiyar-dam-dispute-between-kerala-and-tamil-nadu-is-unnecessary-567858 | title=The Mullaperiyar Dam dispute between Kerala and Tamil Nadu is unnecessary | date=8 January 2012 | publisher=NDTV | access-date=25 August 2019 ))</ref> From several technical surveys conducted, Kerala states the old [[masonry dam]] built with [[Mortar (masonry)#Lime mortar|lime surkhi mortar]] is structurally getting weaker and costly in leakage and massive cracks - [[Shearing (physics)|shear]] maintenance in [[abutment]]s<ref>((cite book|title=Safety of Existing Dams: Evaluation and Improvement|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2GQrAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA190|date=1 January 1983|publisher=National Academies|pages=190|isbn = 9780309033879|id=NAP:15069))</ref> above all poses a significant danger to an approximate 3 million people living in the region and that it needs to be rebuilt – a move opposed by Tamil Nadu.((Citation needed|date=April 2017|reason=danger to 3 million people can't be claimed without citation)) Tamil Nadu maintains that the endangered dam was repaired in 1979 and insists the dam's walls have been strengthened and that it can hold more water than the current level of 136&nbsp;ft (41 m) and also due to the fact it only takes around 25,000 INR per year payment for an estimated usage of water for 8000 acres per British oppression era lease,<ref>((Cite web |url=http://india-wris.nrsc.gov.in/wrpinfo/images/8/8f/124.pdf |title=Archived copy |access-date=1 February 2017 |archive-date=1 February 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170201023320/http://india-wris.nrsc.gov.in/wrpinfo/images/8/8f/124.pdf |url-status=dead ))</ref> this does not include how many [[Tmcft|tmc feet]] could be shared which is also a blissful loophole in the [[Mullayar]]-"Periyar Lease Deed of 1886" that the government is unwilling to waive. In a 1998 affidavit, the Tamil Nadu government admitted that it drew around 21 tmc ft or 594636000000 L (Five hundred ninety-four billion, six hundred thirty-six million litres) annually for around 230,000 acres.<ref>((Cite web|url=http://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/tamil-nadu-and-kerala-slug-it-out-over-mullaperiyar-dam-5475|title = Tamil Nadu and Kerala slug it out over Mullaperiyar dam))</ref> Although the Periyar River has a total catchment area of 5398 km2 with 114 km2 downstream from the dam in Tamil Nadu, the catchment area of Mullaperiyar Dam itself lies entirely in Kerala and thus its water source is not an inter-State river.<ref name="cwrdm">((cite news|url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/states/kerala/article2783258.ece|title=No part of Mullaperiyaru catchment is in TN: CWRDM Director|year=2012|access-date=26 October 2021|location=India|newspaper=The Hindu))</ref>

Protests, calling for Prime Minister [[Manmohan Singh]] to intervene, erupted across Kerala demanding construction of a new dam to replace the Mullaperiyar dam. These new protests were triggered by recent low-intensity earthquakes that prompted scientists to say the dam could not withstand more intensive tremors. The public and scientific consensus over the seismic vulnerability of the Mullaperiyar dam in Kerala, and Tamil Nadu's resistance in accepting the vulnerability of the Dam has strained the inter-state relationship since the 2000s.<ref>((Cite journal|url=http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199469123.001.0001/acprof-9780199469123|doi=10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199469123.001.0001|title=Contested Knowledge|year=2017|last1=Varughese|first1=Shiju Sam|publisher=Oxford University Press|isbn=978-0-19-946912-3))</ref>

This was followed by the chief minister of Kerala's meeting with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to try to resolve the damaging row with neighbouring Tamil Nadu. As the row intensified, police in Kerala banned gatherings of more than five people at the dam near the Tamil Nadu border. The move was followed by clashes between people from the two states near the town of Kumali. In the country's capital, Members of Parliament from Kerala and Tamil Nadu clashed in India's [[Rajya Sabha|upper house of parliament]] over the Issue. However, the issue is at large in multiple dimensions like water shortage, right to protection, etc.<ref>((Cite web |url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bengaluru/Rain-dependent-southern-states-spar-over-sharing-water-India-Water-Week-is-currently-being-observed/articleshow/51764291.cms |title=Rain-dependent southern states spar over sharing water (India Water Week is currently being observed) - Times of India |website=[[The Times of India]] |access-date=1 February 2017 |archive-date=10 June 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170610055848/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bengaluru/Rain-dependent-southern-states-spar-over-sharing-water-India-Water-Week-is-currently-being-observed/articleshow/51764291.cms |url-status=dead ))</ref>

Thousands of people of Kerala have formed a 208&nbsp;km human wall in the following day((Citation needed|date=April 2017)) to demand a replacement to the dam although Tamil Nadu insists it is safe and that water levels can be raised. The protest was led by the opposition [[Left Democratic Front (Kerala)|Left Democratic Front]] (LDF) in which politicians, social activists and families along the way took part.<ref name=hindustantimes0>((cite web |url=http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Kerala/208-km-human-chain-formed-for-new-Kerala-dam/Article1-779624.aspx |title=208-km human chain formed for new Kerala dam |publisher=Hindustan Times |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111209083809/http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Kerala/208-km-human-chain-formed-for-new-kerala-dam/article1-779624.aspx |archive-date=2011-12-09 ))</ref> The central government has invited senior officials from both states to discuss the issue later in December 2011.

In May 2014, [[Supreme Court of India]] ruled that the water level in the dam can be increased from 136&nbsp;ft to 142&nbsp;ft. It also struck down Kerala Irrigation Water Conservation Act and constituted a permanent Supervisory Committee to oversee all the issues concerning Mullaperiyar dam.<ref>((cite web|title=Kerala to file a review petition in Apex Court in Mullaperiyar verdict|url=http://news.biharprabha.com/2014/05/kerala-to-file-review-petition-in-apex-court-in-mullaperiyar-verdict/|work=IANS|publisher=news.biharprabha.com|access-date=8 May 2014))</ref>

In a UN report published in 2021, the dam was identified as one among the world's big dams which needs to be decommissioned for being 'situated in a seismically active area with significant structural flaws and poses risk to 3.5 million people if the 100+ years old dam were to fail'.<ref>((Cite news|url=https://scroll.in/article/986601/mullaperiyar-dam-in-kerala-is-a-ticking-time-bomb-waiting-to-explode|title=Kerala's Mullaperiyar dam is a ticking time bomb waiting to explode|website=The Scroll))</ref><ref>((Cite news|url=https://unu.edu/media-relations/releases/ageing-dams-pose-growing-threat.html|title=Ageing dams pose growing threat|website=United Nations University))</ref>

== Interstate dispute ==
For Tamil Nadu, Mullaperiyar dam and the diverted Periyar waters act as a source for Theni, Madurai, Dindigul, Sivagangai and Ramanathapuram districts, providing water for irrigation, drinking and also for the generation of power in Lower Periyar Power Station. Tamil Nadu has insisted on exercising its unfettered rights to control the dam and its waters, based on the 1866 lease agreement.((Citation needed|date=April 2017))Kerala has pointed out the unfairness in the 1886 lease agreement and has challenged the validity of this agreement. However, safety concerns posed by the 116-year-old dam to the safety of the people of Kerala in the event of a dam collapse, have been the focus of disputes from 2009 onward. Kerala's proposal for decommissioning the dam and construction of a new dam on the basis of environmental and life-threatening risk it possesses has been challenged by Tamil Nadu.

Tamil Nadu has insisted on raising the water level in the dam to 142 feet, pointing outcrop failures. One estimate maintains that "the crop losses to Tamil Nadu, because of the reduction in the height of the dam, between 1980 and 2005 is a whopping ((INR)) 40,000 crores. In the process the farmers of the erstwhile rain shadow areas in Tamil Nadu who had started a thrice-yearly cropping pattern had to go back to the bi-annual cropping."<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20070113213632/http://www.hardnewsmedia.com/portal/2006/03/413 The Mullaperiyar imbroglio]. Hard News. April 2006</ref>

The Kerala Government states that this is not true and the objections raised are political than for welfare. During the year 1979–80 the gross area cultivated in Periyar command area was ((convert|171307|acre|km2)). After the lowering of the level to ((convert|136|ft|m|abbr=on)), the gross irrigated area increased and in 1994–95 it reached ((convert|229718|acre|km2)).<ref>[http://expert-eyes.org/mullaperiyar.html Kerala Government's arguments]. Expert-eyes.org. Retrieved on 2011-11-25.</ref> The Tamil Nadu government had increased its withdrawal from the reservoir, with additional facilities to cater to the increased demand from newly irrigated areas.((Citation needed|date=December 2009))

In 2006, the [[Supreme Court of India]] by its decision by a three-member division bench,  allowed for the storage level to be raised to ((convert|142|ft|m)) pending completion of the proposed strengthening measures, provision of other additional vents and implementation of other suggestions.<ref>
[https://web.archive.org/web/20070311211445/http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/feb282006/national2155542006227.asp Mullaperiyar water level can be raised]. Deccan Herald. 28 February 2006</ref>

However, the [[Government of Kerala|Kerala government]] promulgated a new "Dam Safety Act" against increasing the storage level of the dam, which has not been objected by the Supreme Court. Tamil Nadu challenged it on various grounds. The Supreme Court issued notice to Kerala to respond, however did not stay the operation of the Act even as an interim measure. The Court then advised the States to settle the matter amicably, and adjourned hearing in order to enable them to do so. The Supreme Court of India termed the act as not unconstitutional.<ref>
[https://web.archive.org/web/20070313155619/http://www.hindu.com/2006/09/09/stories/2006090911840400.htm Mullaperiyar: apex court issues notice to Government ]. The Hindu. 9 September 2006. Retrieved on 2011-11-25.</ref> Meanwhile, the Supreme Court constituted a Constitution bench to hear the case considering its wide ramifications.<ref name="MWR">((cite web
 |author      = Ministry of Water Resources
 |publisher   = Govt. of India
 |title       = Mulla Periyar Dam issue
 |url         = http://mowr.gov.in/index3.asp?subsublinkid=751&langid=1&sslid=733
 |access-date  = 2011-12-06
 |date        = 2011-12-02
 |url-status     = dead
 |archive-url  = https://web.archive.org/web/20110828193337/http://www.mowr.gov.in/index3.asp?subsublinkid=751&langid=1&sslid=733
 |archive-date = 2011-08-28
))</ref>

Kerala did not object giving water to Tamil Nadu. Their main cause of objection is the dams safety as it is as old as 110 years. Increasing the level would add more pressure to be handled by already leaking dam.<ref name="6decndtv">((cite news
|title=Mullaperiyar dam row: Clashes at Kerala-Tamil Nadu border post
|url=http://www.ndtv.com/article/kerala/mullaperiyar-dam-row-clashes-at-kerala-tamil-nadu-border-post-155641
|access-date=6 December 2011
|newspaper=[[New Delhi Television|NDTV]]
|date=6 December 2011
))</ref> Tamil Nadu wants the 2006 order of Supreme court be implemented so as to increase the water level to ((convert|142|ft|m)).

In May 2014, Supreme Court of India declared Kerala Irrigation and Water Conservation (Amendment) Act, 2006 as unconstitutional and allowed Tamil Nadu to raise water level from 136&nbsp;ft to 142&nbsp;ft and also formed a permanent Supervisory Committee to take care of the issues relating to the dam.<ref>((Cite news|url = http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/sc-allows-tn-to-increase-mullaperiyar-water-level/article5985048.ece?homepage=true|title = SC allows TN to increase Mullaperiyar water level|work = The Hindu| date=7 May 2014 |access-date = 2014-05-07| last1=Venkatesan | first1=J. ))</ref>

== Justice A.S. Anand Committee (Empowered Committee) ==

On 18 February 2010, the Supreme Court decided to constitute a five-member empowered committee to study all the issues of Mullaperiyar Dam and seek a report from it within six months.<ref>((cite news|url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article108195.ece | location=Chennai, India | work=The Hindu |title=Supreme Court constitutes empowered committee to go into Mullaperiyar issues | date=17 February 2010))</ref> The Bench in its draft order said Tamil Nadu and Kerala would have the option to nominate a member each, who could be either a retired judge or a technical expert. The five-member committee will be headed by former Chief Justice of India [[Adarsh Sein Anand|A. S. Anand]] to go into all issues relating to the dam's safety and the storage level. However, the then ruling party of Tamil Nadu, DMK, passed a resolution that not only opposes the apex court's decision to form the five-member committee but also said that the state government will not nominate any member to it.<ref>((cite news|url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/article110135.ece | location=Chennai, India | work=The Hindu |title=DMK for keeping away from panel on Mullaperiyar | date=20 February 2010))</ref>

The then Tamil Nadu Chief Minister [[M. Karunanidhi]] said that immediately after the Supreme Court announced its decision to set up a committee, he had written to the Congress Party president asking the Centre to mediate between Kerala and Tamil Nadu on Mullaperiyar issue.<ref>((cite news
|url=http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-02-21/india/28133026_1_mullaperiyar-dam-inter-state-river-water-disputes-cauvery-issue
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131105155218/http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-02-21/india/28133026_1_mullaperiyar-dam-inter-state-river-water-disputes-cauvery-issue
|url-status=dead
|archive-date=5 November 2013
|work=[[The Times of India]]
| title=DMK against SC panel on the dam
| date=21 February 2010
))</ref> However, the then Leader of Opposition i.e., the Ex-Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu [[J. Jayalalithaa]] objected to the TN Government move. She said that this would give an advantage to Kerala in the issue.<ref>((cite news| url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article111203.ece | location=Chennai, India | work=The Hindu |title=Jayalalithaa criticises Karunanidhi over Mullaperiyar issue | date=22 February 2010))</ref> Meanwhile, Kerala Water Resources Minister [[N. K. Premachandran]] told the state Assembly that the State should have the right of construction, ownership, operation and maintenance of the new dam while giving water to Tamil Nadu on the basis of a clear cut agreement. He also informed the media that Former Supreme Court Judge Mr. K. T. Thomas will represent Kerala on the expert panel constituted by Supreme Court.<ref>((cite news
|url=http://www.hindu.com/2010/03/04/stories/2010030461410800.htm
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100309145651/http://www.hindu.com/2010/03/04/stories/2010030461410800.htm
|url-status=dead
|archive-date=9 March 2010
| location=Chennai, India
|work=[[The Hindu]]
| title=K.T. Thomas to be on Mullaperiyar panel
| date=4 March 2010
))</ref>

On 8 March 2010, Tamil Nadu told the Supreme Court that it was not interested in adjudicating the dispute with Kerala before the special "empowered" committee appointed by the apex court for settling the inter-State issue.<ref>((cite news|url=http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/article221094.ece | location=Chennai, India | work=The Hindu |title=Tamil Nadu not interested in adjudicating Mullaperiyar before panel | date=8 March 2010))</ref> However, Supreme Court refused to accept Tamil Nadu's request to scrap the decision to form the empowered committee. The Supreme Court also criticized the Union Government for its reluctance in funding the empowered committee.<ref>((cite news| url=http://www.hindu.com/2010/03/30/stories/2010033055571300.htm | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100403033545/http://www.hindu.com/2010/03/30/stories/2010033055571300.htm | url-status=dead | archive-date=3 April 2010 | location=Chennai, India | work=[[The Hindu]] | title=Tamil Nadu plea dismissed, empowered panel on Mullaperiyar will stay | date=30 March 2010))</ref>

Implementing directions of the Supreme Court, the Central Government extended the terms of Empowered Committee for a further period of six months, namely till 30 April 2012.<ref name="MWR"/>

In its report submitted to the Supreme Court on 25 April 2012, the committee is understood to have said: "The dam is structurally, hydrologically, and seismically safe." Last year's earth tremors in that region "did not have any impact on the Mullaperiyar dam and the Idukki reservoir and there was no danger to the safety of the two dams." [https://indiankanoon.org/doc/41744252/] [https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/mullaperiyar-dam-structurally-hydrologically-safe-panel/article3353151.ece]

==Supervisory Committee==

In 2014 the Supreme Court constituted a permanent Supervisory Committee to oversee all the aspects concerning Mullaperiyar dam. The Supervisory Committee consisting of three members one member from the Central Water Commission of The Water Resource Ministry who will act as the chairman of the Supervisory Committee and two other members from the respective states. The Supervisory Committee will also have a Sub Committee under it consisting of five engineer members headed by engineer from Central Water Commission and two other members from the respective states of Tamil Nadu and Kerala.

== Construction of a new dam ==
[[File:Padhathi pradesham.JPG|thumb|right|300px|Mullaperiyar reservoir]]
Kerala enacted the ''Kerala Irrigation and Water Conservation (Amendment) Act, 2006'' to ensure safety of all 'endangered' dams in the State, listed in the second schedule to the Act. Section 62A of the Act provides for listing in the schedule, "details of the dams which are endangered on account of their age, degeneration, degradation, structural or other impediments as are specified".<ref>[http://www.kerenvis.nic.in/legislation/Microsoft%20Word%20-%20Act%202006.pdf Kerala Irrigation and Water Conservation (Amendment) Act, 2006]</ref><ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20131203034254/http://www.hindu.com/2006/09/19/stories/2006091916870600.htm "Kerala Justifies Enactment of the Act", the Hindu, Sept 19, 2006]</ref> The second schedule to the Act lists Mullaperiyar (dam) constructed in 1895 and fixes 136 feet as its maximum water level. The Act empowers ''Kerala Dam Safety Authority'' (Authority specified in the Act) to oversee safety of dams in the State and sec 62(e) empowers the Authority to direct the custodian (of a dam) "to suspend the functioning of any dam, to decommission any dam or restrict the functioning of any dam if public safety or threat to human life or property, so require".  The Authority can conduct periodical inspection of any dam listed in the schedules.

In pursuance of Kerala's dam safety law declaring Mullaperiyar dam as an endangered dam,  in September 2009, the Ministry of Environment and Forests of Government of India granted environmental clearance to Kerala for conducting survey for new dam downstream.<ref>
[https://web.archive.org/web/20160117172805/http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/article153387.ece "The New Indian Express", 17 September 2009]</ref> Tamil Nadu approached Supreme Court for a stay order against the clearance; however, the plea was rejected. Consequently, the survey was started in October, 2009.
Later strengthening the dam's previously fractured areas was inspected. Kerala Govt has communicated with the Central Govt and Tamil Nadu for extension of the project and for preparing and acquiring modern and scientific plans with all possible factors tabulated.<ref name="MWR"/>

In 2014 while passing the final judgement the Supreme Court has laid down criteria for any future construction of new dam downstream the present Mullaperiyar Dam under the "Way Forward - Towards an amicable solution" or a tunnel solution as suggested by the Empowered Committee.

After suggesting the proposals the Supreme Court in its 2014 final verdict stated "we however grant liberty to the parties to apply to the Court if they are able to arrive at some amicable solution on either of the two alternatives suggested by the Empowered Committee"

== References ==
((Reflist))
*[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-15969933 ''BBC News'' Tamil Nadu-Kerala dam row intensifies in India]
*[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-15997656 ''BBC News'' Mullaperiyar dam: Kerala leader Chandy meets PM Singh]
*[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-16047880 ''BBC News'' Mullaperiyar dam: Kerala police ban protest meetings]
*[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-16069332 ''BBC News'' India dam row: Kerala and Tamil Nadu MPs clash]
*[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-16083401 ''BBC News'' Indian protesters form human wall to demand new dam]

==See also==
*[[1979 Machchhu dam failure]]
*[[Mullaperiyar dam]]
*[[Kaveri River water dispute]]
*[[Ravi River#Interstate water dispute|Ravi-Beas dispute]]
*[[Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal]]
*[[Narmada River#Early background and dispute|Narmada dispute]]
*[[Sutlej Yamuna link canal]]

[[Category:Dam controversies]]
[[Category:Inter-state disputes in India]]
[[Category:History of Kerala (1947–present)]]
[[Category:History of Tamil Nadu (1947–present)]]

Pages transcluded onto the current version of this page (help):

Tamil Nadu-Kerala dam row (edit)
Template:Ambox (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Category handler (view source) (protected)
Template:Citation needed (view source) (protected)
Template:Cite book (view source) (protected)
Template:Cite journal (view source) (protected)
Template:Cite news (view source) (protected)
Template:Cite web (view source) (protected)
Template:Cleanup rewrite (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Convert (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:DMCA (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Dated maintenance category (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Dated maintenance category (articles) (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Delink (view source) (protected)
Template:FULLROOTPAGENAME (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Find sources mainspace (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Fix (view source) (protected)
Template:Fix/category (view source) (protected)
Template:INR (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Indian Rupee (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Main other (view source) (protected)
Template:More citations needed (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Ns has subpages (view source) (protected)
Template:Reflist (view source) (protected)
Template:Reflist/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Template:Use Indian English (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Use dmy dates (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Arguments (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/blacklist (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/config (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/data (view source) (protected)
Module:Category handler/shared (view source) (protected)
Module:Check for unknown parameters (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1 (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/COinS (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Date validation (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Identifiers (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Utilities (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/Whitelist (view source) (protected)
Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Module:Convert (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Convert/data (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Convert/text (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Delink (view source) (protected)
Module:Find sources (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Find sources/config (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Find sources/links (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Find sources/templates/Find sources mainspace (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Message box (view source) (protected)
Module:Message box/ambox.css (view source) (protected)
Module:Message box/configuration (view source) (protected)
Module:Namespace detect/config (view source) (protected)
Module:Namespace detect/data (view source) (protected)
Module:Ns has subpages (view source) (protected)
Module:String (view source) (protected)
Module:Unsubst (view source) (protected)
Module:Yesno (view source) (protected)

Return to Tamil Nadu-Kerala dam row.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_Nadu-Kerala_dam_row"