Kannada, Kannadiga, Kannadigaru, Karnataka,

Kannadigarella ondaagi Kannadavannu ulisona, kalisona and belesona

Water Starved Karnataka & Water Wasting TN – Exclusive

Water Starved Karnataka & Water Wasting TN – Exclusive

by ekavi / ellakavi associate and partner: Ravinder Singh

Water Starved Karnataka & Water Wasting TN – Exclusive


Honorable Sh. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam,

President of India,

Rashtrapati Bhawan,

New Delhi- 110016.

February22, 2007


Petitioner; Ravinder Singh, WIPO Awarded Inventor & Consultant, New Delhi.


[Summary; Cauvery Tribunal Award Has Ignored The Needs Of Karnataka In Prescribing Water Release Schedule That Firstly Results In Excess Release Of 125 TMC of Water Than Allocated & Secondly Tribunal Award Has No Provision For Sharing Surplus Water In Lower Basin Like Last Two Water Years. On Long Term Average 250 TMC Of Water Is Wasted In 2-3 Months Of Peak Monsoon Activity In The Absence Of Adequate Storage Particularly In Upper Basin. Professional Review Of The Award Is Required To Address The Critical Needs Of Upper Basin.]


Respected Sir,


Your urgent intervention is required in these matters in ensuring equitable use of water resources and optimizing food productivity.


It is unfortunate even in six decades of democracy we have not been able to address our critical problems like water use, sanitation and produce adequate food for our people. In this India is at least two centuries behind the developed countries.




First A Glimpse Of Narmada Water In Focus For Two Decades;


Just a look at the River Basin map of Madhya Pradesh in the above link which I matched it with India’s Water Wealth to be accurate, will make you realize Narmada River (Yellow) waters could have been easily and in expensively transferred to “Dry Upper Basins” of Sone River (Turmeric Color), Ken River (Orange), Betwa River (Pink) and Chambal River (Light Green) basins.


Even after six decades of development and after building numerous dams Madhya Pradesh is not serious in delivering 18 maf waters allocated to MP farmers in dry upper basins but all 30 dams,10 largest already built are lined to serve Gujarat up two thousand km away. Though a medium project near Jabalpur transfers Narmada Waters to Sone basin.


But most strange is the Ken-Betwa Link that is clone of Sardar Sarovar Project similar in design and high cost of $4b but shall transfer only 0.5 maf water that is just 0.7% of waters in Madhya Pradesh Rivers. Give me $1b I shall transfer 18 maf of surplus Narmada Waters in to farms of Madhya Pradesh.


The MP case was important to explain that in above five large states and central government were directly involved for 6 decades but water is being wasted and unproductively utilized Pointing To Complete Failure Of Concerned Governments In Wasting Water And Public Money. There Is No Concern For Sufferings Of Farmers, Poverty & Hunger Of People.


MP has abundant water resources of 85 BCM but only 5% or under 1 million hectares of its cultivated area is irrigated by Canals. Most of dams don’t produce even reasonable amount of electricity.


Water Starved Karnataka & Water Wasting TN;


In 2002 I got involved in Kaveri Dispute and found that for over 100 years farmers of Karnataka are prevented from using riparian waters for irrigation and most of the water is allowed to go waste. So I recommended building new dams to Capture surplus rains in Cauvery basin which at times was twice the allocated flows.




In the above Frontline story in 2002 one can easily make out of 205 TMC of water prescribed in Cauvery award, releases at Biligundulu CWC monitoring stations 60 kilometers upstream of Mettur Dam were supposed to be 180 TMC 25 TMC of water is generated between CWC monitoring station and Mettur Dam in 12 months water cycle, but average releases were 305 TMC. Never even once water releases were short of full year award except in 95-96 season when water releases were 183 though in previous year 94-95 releases were 373 TMC which is close to the 419 TMC allocated for TN in the basin coming from Karnataka alone.


It was also found that TN main paddy crop called Samba season is October-December and TN wanted 137 TMC of water to be released by September30 every year. This was “Technical Mischief” that let TN extract average of 305 TMC water + 25 TMC of water. 


·        It was therefore a patent mischief of TN politicians to create trouble for Karnataka and GOI. In doing so wasting Cauvery waters in most of times.


·        President of India may please note even in 2002-03 when CJI was almost ready to put Chief Minister SM Krishna in Jail in crisis year for Karnataka, water releases were actually 223.56 TMC and live storage in Mettur was 5.96 TMC against prescribed release of 205 TMC as given in clippings of MoWR report May2003.


But I am shocked there was only 0.45 TMC of water in all four dams in Karnataka on May30, 2003 that year.


TN through “Judicial Extortion” drained out all four dams of Karnakata as if Karnataka is not entitled to store water in its dams for its own use and for emergency.


2003-04 seasons was worst monsoon year and water releases were 76 TMC at Biligundulu when food production in India dropped from 212 Million Tons to 173 Million Tones. All four Karnataka dams were completely dry.




2004-05 was normal year when water releases at Biligundulu were 185 TMC that translates to 210 TMC.


·        But 2005-06 and 2006-07 are record years. Water releases at Biligundulu in 2005-06 were 383.91 TMC exactly double of 192 TMC annual releases prescribed in recent tribunal award.























·        Study of water year 2005-06 as given under and in rainfall pattern that doesn’t exactly describe the situation but enough to give an idea about the state monsoon progress, illustrates that after a normal year 2004-05 when rains blessed Cauvery Basin when TN was flooded there were no dams to hold back water for distress years and for irrigating second or third crop in June-December2005 period.


·        Roughly 250 TMC of Karnataka releases and 300 TMC in TN were wasted in a single water year or three years of releases prescribed by Tribunal.


·        When rainfall in plains of Cauvery Basin this year 2006 failed excess rains in TN couldn’t come to the aid of Karnataka.


·        The following chart illustrates that after precarious conditions in Karnataka in May2005 normal year 2004-5, after a slow start in just two months July and August 2005 all dams were full and overflowing even as using water to maximum capacity or requirement.


WATER YEAR June2005-May06




Monthly Releases

Releases 2004-05

Live Storage

Mettur TN

Live Storage Four Dams Karnataka






June 2005





July 2005





Aug. 2005





Sept. 2005





Oct. 2005





Nov. 2005




































·              Current year is heading for another good year. On November30, 2006 water already released was 216.64 TMC and 86.91 TMC water was in storage in Mettur Dam. TN already consumed 212 TMC, and 86.91 TMC water were in storage as on November30, 2006. Very good rains this year also points to waste of say 300 TMC of water.


·        The above link gives the rainfall for October-December 2006 period. Chennai for example received 957 mm of rains when practically rest of the country was practically and ten times more than Bangalouru only 92 mm.



Monthly Releases

Releases For 2006-07

Live Storage

Mettur, TN

Live Storage Four Dams Karnataka






June 2006





July 2006





Aug. 2006





Sept. 2006





Oct. 2006





Nov. 2006








1. Judicial award of Cauveri Tribunal results in excess release of over 125 TMC from Karnataka section of Cauvery Basin and over all on long term average something like 250 TMC of Cauvery water is wasted to sea in 3-4 months due to in adequate dam storages particularly in Karnataka.


2. Storages in both upper and lower basin are essential for optimum utilization of Cauvery waters.


3. Single full season paddy crop cycle should be adopted for both basins.



Ravinder Singh







Status of Cauvery Flows into Mettur Reservoir Nov 2006 Six Months

        As per the Interim order of Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal, the inflow into Mettur reservoir for November, 2006 and cumulative inflow during the water year ‘June, 2006 – May, 2007’ (from 01.06.2006 to 30.11.2006) are required to be 16.05 TMC and 183.22 TMC respectively.

        As per Government of Tamil Nadu, inflow during November, 2006 and cumulative inflow during water year ‘June, 2006 – May, 2007’ (from 01.06.2006 to 30.11.2006) at Mettur dam are 27.88 TMC and 216.64 TMC respectively.

        The Mettur Reservoir is having live storage capacity of 86.91 TMC against live storage capacity of 93.47 TMC as on 30.11.2006. The total active storage of the four reservoirs of Karnataka as on 30.11.2006 is 54.86 TMC.

Status of Cauvery Flows into Mettur Reservoir May 2006

          As per the Interim order of Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal, the inflow into Mettur reservoir for May, 2006 and cumulative inflow during the water year ‘June, 2005 – May, 2006’ (from 01.06.2005 to 31.05.2006) are required to be 2.01 TMC and 205 TMC respectively.

        As per Government of Tamil Nadu, inflow during May, 2006 and cumulative inflow during water year ‘June, 2005 – May, 2006’ (from 01.06.2005 to 31.05.2006) at Mettur dam are 7.81 TMC and 402.18 TMC respectively.

       The Mettur Reservoir is having live storage capacity of 83.083 TMC against live storage capacity of 93.47 TMC as on 31.05.2006. The total active storage of the four reservoirs of Karnataka as on 31.05.2006 is 12.833 TMC.

Status of Cauvery Flows into Mettur Reservoir May 2005

          As per the Interim order of Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal, the inflows into Mettur reservoir for May, 2005 and cumulative inflow during the water year ‘June, 2004 – May, 2005’ (from 01.06.2004 to 31.05.2005) are required to be 2.01 TMC and 205.00 TMC respectively.

        As per Government of Tamil Nadu, inflow during May, 2005 and cumulative inflow during water year ‘June, 2004 – May, 2005’ (from 01.06.2004 to 31.05.2005) at Mettur dam are 2.31 TMC and 163.96 TMC respectively.

       The live storage in Mettur Reservoir as on 31.05.2005 is 19.22 TMC against its total live capacity of 93.48 TMC. The total active storage of the four reservoirs of Karnataka as on 30.05.2005 is .004 TMC.

Status of Cauvery Flows into Mettur Reservoir May 2004

As per the Interim order of Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal, the inflows into Mettur reservoir for April, 2004 and cumulative inflow during the water year ‘June, 2003- May, 2004’ from 01.06.2003 to 30.04.2004 are required to be 2.32 TMC and 202.99 TMC respectively.

As per Government of Tamil Nadu, inflow during April, 2004 and cumulative inflow from 01.06.2003 to 30.04.2004 during water year ‘June 2003 – May 2004’ at Mettur dam are 1.008 TMC and 62.095 TMC respectively. The live storage in Mettur Reservoir is 6.047 TMC on 30.04.2004 against its total live capacity of 93.48 TMC. The total active storage of the four major reservoirs of Karnataka in Cauvery basin as on 30.04.2004 is 0.198 TMC.

Status of Cauvery Flows into Mettur Reservoir May 2003

As per the Interim order of Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal, the inflows into Mettur  reservoir for May, 2003 and cumulative inflow during the water year ‘June, 2002- May, 2003’ from 01.06.2002 to 31.05.2003 are required to be 2.01 TMC  and 205.00 TMC respectively.

As per Government of Tamil Nadu, inflow during May 2003 and cumulative inflow from 01.06.2002 to 31.05.2003 during water year ‘June, 2002- May, 2003’ at Mettur dam are 0.61 TMC and 94.65 TMC respectively.  The live storage in Mettur Reservoir is 5.96 TMC on 31.05.2003 against its total live capacity of 93.48 TMC.

The total inflows into the four Karnataka reservoirs from 01.06.2002 to 31.05.2003 during water year ‘June, 2002- May, 2003’ is 223.56 TMC. The total active storage of the four reservoirs as on 31.05.2003 is 0.45 TMC.

            Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal May 2002

            As per the interim order of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal, the scheduled inflow into the Mettur Reservoir for May, 2002 was required to be 2.01 Thousand Million Cubic Feet. Against this, the observed flow at the Biligundulu site in Karnataka, maintained by the Central Water Commission (CWC) (about 60 kms. upstream of the Mettur Reservoir), was 3.84 Thousand Million Cubic Feet. As on 31st May, 2002 the live storage in Mettur was 11.36 Thousand Million Cubic Feet, against its total live capacity of 93.48 Thousand Million Cubic Feet.

            The Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal held its hearings on 1st, 2nd, 6th and 7th May, 2002.  In this hearing, the Tribunal continued the arguments on the issues framed by it.  The date of next sitting for arguments is 4th July, 2002.

February 25, 2007 Posted by | Bangalore, Karnataka and Kannada, Nanjundappa Report | 3 Comments

ನಿನ್ನ ನೆನಪಾಯಿತು..!!


ನಿನ್ನ ಕಳೆದುಕೊಂಡ ನಾನು
ಇನ್ನೂ ಬದುಕಿರುವೆನೆಂದರೆ
ಒಮ್ಮೆಯಾದರು ನೀನು ಬಂದು
ನನ್ನ ಕನಸಲ್ಲಾದರೂ ಲಾಲಿ
ಹಾಡುವೆಯೆಂಬಾ ಮಹದಾಸೆಯಿಂದ..!

ಬಯಗೊಳಿಸುವ ಕತ್ತಲಿದೆ
ಆದರೂ ಅರೆಕ್ಷಣ ಕಣ್ಣುಮುಚ್ಚುತ್ತಿಲ್ಲ!
ಕಣ್ಣಾಲೆಗಳ ತುಂಬ ನಿನ್ನ ಹಾಡುಗಳೇ
ನಿನ್ನ ಹಾಡಿನ ಲಾಲಿಯ ಜೋಕಾಲಿಯಲ್ಲಿ
ಪಾಪ ಕತ್ತಲೂ ಕೂಡ ನನ್ನ ಮುಂದೆ ಕಣ್ಮುಚ್ಚಿ ಮಲಗಿದೆ..!!

ಒಂಟಿತನ,ಬೇಸರ, ತಬ್ಬಲಿತನಗಳು
ನೀ ಕೊಟ್ಟ ಬಳುವಳಿಗಳೆಂದು ತಿಳಿದ ಮೇಲೆ
ನನಗ್ಯಾವುದರ ಅರಿವಿಲ್ಲ..!!
ಹೃದಯವೇ ಇಲ್ಲದವನಲ್ಲಿ ಇನ್ನು ಅನುಭವಗಳೆಲ್ಲಿ..!!!

ನಿನ್ನ ಜಿಂಕೆಮರಿಯಂದಿದ್ದೆ
ನನ್ನ ಅಪರಾಧವಾಯಿತೆ ಗೆಳತಿ..!
ಕ್ಷಣದೊಳಗೆ ನನ್ನನ್ನಗಲಿ
ನೀ ಅಗೋಚರ ದಿಕ್ಕಿಗೆ ಸಾಗಿ ಬಿಟ್ಟೆ
ನೋಡಿಲ್ಲಿ ನನ್ನೆದೆಯಾಳದ
ಮೈದಾನ ನಿನ್ನಾಟವಿಲ್ಲದ ಬರಡು ಬರಡು..!!

ನನಗೆ ನೀನು ನೆರಳ ಕೊಡದಿದ್ದರು
ಚಿಂತೆಯಿಲ್ಲವೆ ಗೆಳತಿ..ಬಿರುಬಿಸಿಲು ಬೇಡ
ನಿನ್ನ ಚಂದ್ರನಿಗೆ ಹೋಲಿಸಿದ್ದು ನಾನು
ನನ್ನ ನಂಬಿಕೆ ಸುಳ್ಳಾಗದಿರಲಿ…!

ನಾನು ಯಾವತ್ತೂ ದೇವರನ್ನು
ನಂಬುವುದಿಲ್ಲ, ಕನಸಿನಲ್ಲಿಯು ಕೂಡ..!
ಕಣ್ಣಾಗಿದ್ದ ನೀನು ನನ್ನ ಅಗಲಿದೆಯಲ್ಲ…!

ನನಗೆ ನಿನ್ನ ನೆನಪಾಗುತ್ತಿಲ್ಲ,
ನನಗೇನು ಅನ್ನಿಸುತ್ತಿಲ್ಲ,
ನಾನೇನನ್ನು ಕಳೆದುಕೊಂಡಿಲ್ಲ,
ನೋಡಿ..ಹೃದಯವೂ ಸುಳ್ಳು ಹೇಳುವುದು

ನಾನು ಇಷ್ಟೊಂದು ನಲಿವು ಗೆಲವು
ಸಂತೋಷಗಳ ಮದ್ಯೆಯೂ
ದುಃಖಿಸುತ್ತೇನಲ್ಲ ಗೆಳತಿ…
ನನಗೆ ನೋವಾಗುವುದಿಲ್ಲ..
ಬದಲಾಗಿ ನಿನ್ನ ನೆನಪಾಯಿತಲ್ಲವೆಂದು
ದುಃಖದಲ್ಲು ನಗುತ್ತಿರುತ್ತೇನೆ..!!

ನನಗೆ ಪ್ರತಿದಿನ ಬರುವ
ಕನಸುಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಒಂದು ವಿನಂತಿಯೆಂದರೆ
ನನಗೆ ಅವಳ ಒಂದಷ್ಟು ನಗುವಾದರು ತನ್ನಿ
ನಾನು ನಗಬೇಕಿದೆ…!!!

February 18, 2007 Posted by | Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Final award may leave Bangalore parched{CAUVERY ISSUE}

Final award may leave Bangalore parched
From K S Subramanya DH News Service New delhi:
Bangalore may become uninhabitable in not-so-distant future, unless Karnataka farmers from the Cauvery basin area spare some water from their share for the burgeoning population here.


Bangalore may become uninhabitable in not-so-distant future, unless Karnataka farmers from the Cauvery basin area spare some water from their share for the burgeoning population here.

Sample this: the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal has in its final order concluded that two-thirds of the State capital are not entitled to Cauvery water. The reason: two-thirds of the City lie outside the Cauvery basin area in Karnataka.

The tribunal, thus, took into consideration the drinking water requirement of only one-third of Bangalore. The quantity of water allotted: 0.87 tmc ft.

Actually, 0.87 TMC is the gross drinking water allocation made by the tribunal for one-third of Bangalore and other cities and towns of Karnataka falling within the basin area.

“Since two-thirds of Bangalore City lie outside the basin, we are considering the drinking water requirement of Bangalore City for its portion of that area which lies within the Cauvery basin…” the final order states on Page 102, Volume 5.

Silicon city

While making projections of the drinking water requirement for year 2011, the tribunal did its calculations on the basis of the 1991 Census. Ironically, all that development Bangalore underwent in the last decade – the City has grown into a silicon hub, attracting migrant work force from across the country and lately abroad – were in vain after all.

The State government had made an appeal to allocate 30 tmc ft of water for Bangalore City. The final order, however, said: “We are considering the existing requirements as indicated in 1990, i.e. 14.52 tmc…,”

The tribunal found that the drinking water requirement of one-third of Bangalore is less than 0.87 tmc ft. The final order does not quantify one-third Bangalore’s share, though. And, 1.75 tmc ft of water is actually allocated for drinking water for one-third of Bangalore, other cities (including Mysore) and towns and rural areas in the entire Cauvery basin area of the state.

What it actually means is the people living in one-third of Bangalore are only entitled to 15 litres of Cauvery water per day per person!

Ground water

How did the tribunal arrive at the figure? The calculation is like this: the total “consumptive” water requirement of one-third of Bangalore and other cities, towns and rural areas is 17.22 tmc ft. Fifty per cent of this requirement will be met from ground water.

The other fifty per cent, i.e. 8.75 tmc ft, has to be met from the river supplies. These figures are arrived at on the basis that 25 per cent of urban population is allowed 135 litres per capita per day (lpcd) while the remaining 75 per cent is allowed 100 lpcd.

In the case of one-third of Bangalore, the tribunal has, however, allowed 150 lpcd. For rural areas of the basin the allocation is 70 lpcd. The total requirement in the three urban categories works out to 8.70 tmc ft and the rural category 8.52. The combined requirement is 17.22 tmc ft, of which 50 per cent (8.75) is to be met from ground water sources.

Consumptive use

Of the remaining 8.75 tmc ft, the actual “consumptive use” is just 20 per cent, which works out to 1.75 tmc ft and urban areas the share works out to 0.87 per cent.

Why only 20 per cent of the actual estimated requirement was allocated?

“Out of 100 units of water initially lifted for domestic use only about 20 units are consumed and the remaining 80 units come back as return flow into the river basin,” the final order says, quoting a past official report to justify allocation of only 20 per cent of its estimated requirement.

February 16, 2007 Posted by | Bangalore, Karnataka and Kannada, Nanjundappa Report | Leave a comment

Are Karnataka Farmers Slaves or Bonded Labors? e.Petition February10, 2007

Are Karnataka Farmers Slaves or Bonded Labors?

From: Ravinder Singh <corruptionfree2007@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat Feb 10, 2007 2:12 am
Subject: Are Karnataka Farmers Slaves or Bonded Labors?

e.Petition February10, 2007


Honorable sh. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam,

President of India

Rashtrapati Bhawan,

New Delhi- 110004


Are Karnataka Farmers Slaves or Bonded Labors? 


Respected Sir,

Firstly I am concerned by the unequal treatment of citizens of two different states by the GOI in Cauvery Tribunal Award, secondly very poor food production in Cauvery basin- potential shortfall of 30 million tones from 5.5 million hectare cultivable area in the basin and thirdly irresponsible conduct of states of India.


Tribunal sadly ignored the needs of the farmers and gave in to politics. Karnataka farmers in Cauvery basin get little rains and little Canal waters to raise a paddy crop but water of Karnataka is taken out to raise 2-3 poor paddy crops in TN.


It would have been satisfying had TN raised something like 20 million tones of paddy from 2-3 crops in 2.9 million hectares, Punjab raises 15 million tones of paddy in single crop over 2.5 million hectares. But yield in four Cauvery districts is 1.2 million tones only. Thus there is a strong case for restricting paddy cultivation to single cropping pattern in both Cauvery basin states.


Inventor�s Award would have been to first focus on fulfilling Karnataka needs of irrigating paddy in Southwest monsoon period and use 270 TMC water allocated to it and then let most of the water in its dams to raise good crop in TN during Northwest monsoon when TN get maximum rains.


Farmers of Karnataka were treated by TN as bonded labor or slaves, which �Robbing� of their water resources render them, while anti bonded labor/slavery laws are in place but farmers of Karnataka have been tied by Tribunal Award for many more generations. A ruler ceded its rights to use riparian waters to another rulers under alien rule and fifth or sixth generation continue to pay the debt like slaves, denied of their natural rights to riparian waters. Clause II of the Tribunal Award recognizes 1892 and 1924 pre independence agreements.


For 115 years Cauvery basin people are fighting over use of Cauvery waters, there is very little productive use of water in Cauvery, food-grains production in TN using most of Cauvery water food production in the four Cauvery districts of TN is just 1.2 million tones or around 5 million tones food grain production in entire basin- Punjab allocated less water than in Cauvery produces 25 million tones. Cauvery could have been producing 35 million tones.




Now it known Tribunal Awarded 192 TMC water at Biligundlu which translates to committed releases of 217 TMC at Mettur Dam against interim award of 205. Water resource of Cauvery is 740 TMC. Tribunal has also awarded 30 TMC to Kerala and 21 TMC of that shall be in Karnataka account. Thus Karnataka has to release 217+21 TMC of water or 238 TMC against 205 prescribed earlier in interim order. 


But mischief in Cauvery Tribunal Award is dependability of 50% against 75% taken as a rule. The water in the basin is calculated to be 740 TMC based on 50% dependability but at Lower Cooleron Anicut- up to 10% of Cauvery water may be generating below the Lower Cooleron Anicut.


It is also noticed that design discharge of the Lower Cooleron Anicut is 4,50,000 cusecs, yield of Cauvery is calculated above this point. There are obviously substantial overflows going waste. Dams in the upstream could have captured substantial surplus waters.


Cauvery Tribunal Award was not influenced by �Expert Opinion or Public Interest� but by political demands. When Karnataka is raising paddy and need maximum water, prescribed releases for June-July-August-September-October months are 10, 34, 50, and 40 TMC = 134 TMC or 70% of 192 TMC prescribed releases in Cauvery for TN. Cauvery Tribunal award therefore sabotages agriculture in Karnataka when it could have easily supported one fully assisted crop each in Karnataka and TN.


It is utterly foolish of the Cauvery Tribunal to prescribe 134 TMC water releases for paddy in June-September when TN get 320 mm rains in 122 days not when TN get 670 mm rains in 92 days for paddy. Tribunal ought to have ensured adequate water releases for main crops in both states and then proceeded to allocate surplus.


Inventor has noted TN has demanded and Cauvery Tribunal Agreed to only 45 TMC or 23% of 192 TMC of water for main Samba crop of paddy during Northwest monsoon October-November-December (22,15 and 8 TMC) to avoid overflows in to sea. Mettur dam has live capacity of 90 TMC so TN could manage up to 135 TMC of water releases Samba crop, which is not adequate for 2.9 million hectares of cultivable land.


Area under paddy in Cauvery districts of TN is 5,70,000 hectares only in four Cauvery districts. Tribunal Award is therefore a big fraud in prescribing 419 TMC to TN.


Data From India�s Water Wealth � by K.L. Rao

Area in Thousand Hectares



Gross Sown

Gross Irrigated

Canal Irrigated











Tamil Nadu











Rainfall In Millimeter In Karnataka

District/ Rains

Actual June1-Sept30 2006

Normal June1 Sept30

Irrigated By

Canal %

Production of Food in %



















26095 (4%)


Approx. Average

300 in 122 Days

400 in122 Days


14.75% of Karnataka







It can be seen in the data given in K.L. Rao book India�s Water Wealth, are under canal irrigation was only 170,000 hectares or 7% of the cultivable area in Karnataka compared to 940,000 hectares or 32% in TN.


Karnataka get most of rains in 122 day Southwest monsoon period but the rainfall in Karnataka four major districts in Cauvery basin below Krishna Raj Sagar dam is 400 mm only. So it is essential to release canal waters to assist paddy cultivation and get good crops.


But in TN most of the rains fall during Northeast Monsoon from October-November-December period.


Rainfall In Millimeter In Tamil Nadu

District/ Normal Rains


June01- Sept30

Oct01- Dec31

















Approx. Average

100 in 92 Days

320 in 122 Days

670 in 92 Days




(A) A law must be enacted to firstly prescribe river waters based on food grains production and to penalize waste of river waters.


(B) One large dam was required by both states to trap water for their use.


(C) Water saving technologies ought to be introduced in conveying waters to crops.


Thank you,



Ravinder Singh

Inventor & Consultant










February 15, 2007 Posted by | Bangalore, Karnataka and Kannada, Nanjundappa Report | 2 Comments

EKAVI and EKAVI Network of Kannadigas all over Karnataka State

 ಎಲ್ಲಾ ಕನ್ನಡ ಅಭಿಮಾನಿಗಳ ಅಂತರರಾಷ್ಟೀಯ ವೇದಿಕೆ – ಈಕವಿ
ಬನ್ನಿ ಎಲ್ಲಾ ಕನ್ನಡಿಗರು ಒಂದಾಗಿ ಕನ್ನಡ ಕೆಲಸಕ್ಕೆ ಮುಂದಾಗೋಣ…

JOIN :: EKAVI and EKAVI Network of Kannadigas in Karnataka State and all over the world
EKAVI’s one of the AIMS & GOALS is to have 100, 000 Kannadigas in the Network of eKavi.

Kannadigas from different Districts join the EKAVI MAIN GROUP and then their repective District Group.

PLEASE forward this to kannadigas you know in Karnataka State and worldwide.

There are many goals !!!!

Ella Kannada Abhimaanigalaantarashtriya Vedike International “EKAVI”


Ella Kannada Abhimaanigala Vedike International – EKAVI


Ella Kannada Abhimaanigala Vedike International “E-KAVI” is A GLOBAL PLATFORM FOR KANNADIGAS ALL OVER THE WORLD.


E-KAVI’s website is: www.ekavi.org .


Pleas join ellaKAVI Group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ellaKAVI

3500 members and growing.







Pakshaateeta Kannada Pranalike article



Kuvempu 100 th Year Celebrations


Click here for the Photos


Click here to download/view the Powerpoint presentation



E-KAVI has started forming Committees in all 27 Districts of Karnataka State to have meetings every month by Kannadigas in that FM 91 Meeting
local area.

This helps to develop network of Kannadigas working for Kannada.

Kannadigas have expressed interest in the following type of activities in “E-KAVI”,


* Holistic suite of activities of Karnataka culture and literature.
* Network of all Kannada associations and Kannada Groups on the net, in all parts of the world.
* To strengthen the activities of Kannadigas all over the world and to create a unified voice.


E-KAVI has got good support from Kannadigas all over the world and they are promoting in their area.

ಎಲ್ಲಾ ಕನ್ನಡ ಅಭಿಮಾನಿಗಳ ಅಂತರರಾಷ್ಟೀಯ ವೇದಿಕೆ – ಈಕವಿ
ಬನ್ನಿ ಎಲ್ಲಾ ಕನ್ನಡಿಗರು ಒಂದಾಗಿ ಕನ್ನಡ ಕೆಲಸಕ್ಕೆ ಮುಂದಾಗೋಣ…
www.ekavi.org ನೋಡಿ.

EKAVI ಈ-ಕವಿ









EKAVI ಈ-ಕವಿ Hubli-Dharwad




EKAVI ಈ-ಕವಿ Dakshina Kannada





EKAVI ಈ-ಕವಿ Chamrajnagara















Below is for information for all kannadigas to know about EKAVI, so that kannadigas can join and work together with EKAVI and promote EKAVI.

EKAVI :: ellakannada – Kannadigas Network


EKAVI :: ekavikannada – Kannadigas Network


February 12, 2007 Posted by | EKAVI, EKAVI BIJAPUR | Leave a comment

Cauvery – Karnatakakke anyaaya – hege / estu?

Cauvery – Karnatakakke anyaaya – hege / estu?

kaverihoraata kaverihoraata <kaverihoraata@ yahoo.co. in> wrote: Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2007 07:27:02 +0000 (GMT)
From: kaverihoraata kaverihoraata <kaverihoraata@ yahoo.co. in>
Subject: Cauvery – Karnatakakke anyaaya – hege / estu?
To: kaverihoraata@ yahoo.co. in

kaleda nooru varshadinda cauvery vishayadalli karnatakakke aagiruva anyaaya haagu munde aagaliruva anyaayada bagge maahiti / vivara lagattisiruva kadatadalli ide.

bahalastu kannadigarige karnatakakke ee mattada anyaayavaagide / anyaaya vaagalide embude gottilla.

kannadigaralli ee vishayada bagge jaagruthi moodisuva agatyavide.  lagattisiruva kadatavanu odi / itara kannadigarige kalisi.



February 10, 2007 Posted by | Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Why the Cauvery award is flawed? Adopt Priniciples of Natural Justice !!!

Why the Cauvery award is flawed

February 06, 2007 – redifmail.com

The verdict by the three-member Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal headed by Justice N P Singh on February 5 fails on some crucial tests of equity, efficiency, technology and science.

The award is bound to be challenged by Karnataka and Kerala, even as Tamil Nadu and Puduchery seem satisfied at this stage. Moreover the ambiguity in the award about sharing the water during distress years is likely to create problems in future.

The Cauvery award fails on the test of science as it does not consider groundwater availability in the Cauvery basin area. It has only decided on the distribution of the surface water among the claimants. Tamil Nadu, being the lower riparian, has significant availability of groundwater, while Karnataka and Kerala, being the upper riparian, have relatively little of it. Groundwater, in reality, is the water lifeline of this country, with over two-thirds of irrigated foodgrains production, over 90 per cent of rural water supply and over 50 per cent of urban water supply dependent on groundwater.

It’s also well known that groundwater and surface water are in dynamic equilibrium. To illustrate, the utilisable surface water in Cauvery basin is 19 BCM (billion cubic metres; 670.89 tmc ft), and replenishable groundwater resource in the basin is 12.3 BCM (434.31 tmc ft), which shows that the groundwater available in the basin is about 67 per cent of the utilisable surface water. To allow unrestricted groundwater use and not include groundwater in calculating water availability and allocation is unscientific, to put it rather charitably.

The award fails the test of efficiency as the tribunal does not reward efficient use of water. It is well known that the farmers in Cauvery delta utilise larger amounts of water from the river. The cropping pattern in the delta includes a double crop of water-intensive paddy. The award, instead of promoting and rewarding more efficient cropping patterns and use of water, seems to be rewarding extravagant water.

The award fails the test of technology as it did not consider the new water efficient method of cultivating rice, called the System of Rice Intensification. This technique has proved effective over thousands of hectares in Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and elsewhere over the last 3-4 years. SRI can reduce water requirements by over 50 per cent and increase yields by 50 per cent or more. If SRI is indeed practiced in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, the perceived water distress in the Cauvery basin could be almost eliminated.

The award also fails the test of equity, as it did not consider the resources and needs of people at the micro level, but looked at the aggregate demands at the macro (state level). When you aggregate the demands in this way, the issues of equity and appropriateness at the micro level is lost entirely. This in fact has the potential of negating the potential water solutions for vast numbers of people in the catchment that contributes to the water in the river. In the Cauvery basin this threat of losing sight of micro issues is very much real, as was seen when the tank desilting project in Karnataka was opposed by Tamil Nadu on the pretext that it will reduce water available in the Mettur dam!

Indeed, as the well-known commentator S Guhan noted, the Cauvery dispute is somewhat different than other water disputes like the Narmada and Godavari in the sense that Cauvery is already an overdeveloped basin, where the dispute is because of the seeming distress caused due to over-development. It is precisely for this reason that the issues of efficiency, technology, equity and science should be even more relevant for the Cauvery case.

Ambiguity: The tribunal is also less than clear about the crucial question of sharing at the times of distress, when the real problems surface. It would have helped if the tribunal had clarified the exact manner of sharing the distress in each month of the year. The fact that the tribunal has used 50 per cent dependable hydrology for adjudication heightens this issue, since this means that the distress will be felt in about 50 per cent of the years. Here it may be added that the climate change due to global warming is only likely to increase the problems of dependability of flows in river. The review period available now before the award becomes final should be used to help clarify such issues.

In fact, past experience of implementing tribunal awards has been far from happy. The number of lingering inter-state water disputes are increasing by the day. The Ravi-Beas dispute between Punjab and Haryana, the Krishna water dispute between Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra, the Godavari dispute between Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Orissa continue to linger. In the Narmada Valley, the disputes between the state and the people, a direct product of the Narmada Tribunal Award, continue, as the award (like all others) had heard only the state, not the people of the valley.

Upper riparian state’s case: Karnataka state officials have given an indication of feeling aggrieved. If we look at the table below, we can see that Karnataka is the only state that has got less share in water than its share in the catchment of the Cauvery basin. When we add the fact that Karnataka basin has less groundwater availability, we see that there is some justification this feeling.

  Area in Cauvery basin, sq km (%) Water allocated, tmc ft (%)
Karnataka 36240 (41.23) 270 (36.49)
Tamil Nadu 48581 (55.27) 419 (56.62)
Kerala 2930 (3.33) 30 (4.05)
Puducherry 149 (0.17) 7 (0.95)
Cauvery basin 87900  

The interim order of the tribunal had directed Karnataka to release 205 tmc ft water and the final order requires Karnataka to release 192 tmc ft. Karnataka has been able to release more than the stipulated amount in 11 of the last 15 years. If that was possible for 205 tmc ft, it should certainly be possible for 192 tmc. Some problems could arise as the award now stipulates monthly release figures.

Karnataka’s options: Section 5(1) of the Inter-State Water Disputes Act provides an opportunity for all concerned states to file clarification petitions (basically seeking explanation or guidance) before the tribunal over the next three months. Even after the final award is notified, the states can go to the Supreme Court. Karnataka and Kerala are likely to explore these avenues. The Centre has no option but to notify the tribunal’s final award. Participant states can delay the formation and implementation of the regulatory body mandated in the award, but it is too premature to discuss such possibilities at this stage.

The Cauvery Family: Fortunately in the Cauvery basin, some useful work has already been done by a collective called the Cauvery Family, of farmers, technical experts and academics from Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, over their nine sittings. This collective will have an important role to play in days to come to ensure that appropriate solutions are brought into the picture missing in the tribunal award and to ensure that people’s real needs are taken care of. If this family is allowed and enabled to perform such a role, it can surely bring about significant improvements in the Cauvery basin.

Amicable solutions to river water disputes are possible only when there is greater democracy in water resources planning and decision-making, something that is totally missing today.

The author is the founder of the NGO — South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers & People


EKAVI says Adopt Principals of Natural Justice

We need to ensure principals of natural justice are applied in the issue.The principles in this context could be:

  1. Only running distance can be used to ensure proportionate distribution of water as per sl number 1 in the table OR
  2. Only quantity of contribution to river system can be used to ensure proportionate distribution of water as per sl number 2 in the table.This would benefit Karnataka most OR
  3. Sum of average of both running distance and quantity of contribution to river system can be used to ensure proportionate distribution of water as per sl number 5 in the table.This would do justice to both but Tamil nadu still will be benefitted.

Some questions:

  1. Tribunal awards distress formula on proportionate basis.But why it did not use same formula for normal conditions?
  2. If previous Karnataka govts were inefficient in utilising avilable water to provide irrigation facilities to people, then what is the fault of a child born in 2007? Does the new born child has to pay for sins of his elders and govt of Karnataka ?
  3. What if Britishers were here and Karnataka had not woken even in 2007 and Tamilnadu continue to increase its irrigation area to utilise 100% Kaveri water? Tribunal would have awarded 100% water to existing farmers of Tamilnadu?

Kaaveri Water


Running Distance in State

Contribution to River



WE want Justice: We must get:








































Please Note:Only partial Data for Kerala and Puducherry available..Hence not used in table
Prepared by Bhujanga


February 9, 2007 Posted by | Bangalore, Karnataka and Kannada, Nanjundappa Report | Leave a comment

Cauvery Verdict- Gross Failure Of Judiciary & GOI

Cauvery Verdict- Gross Failure Of Judiciary & GOI

“Mischief In Tribunal Order”


Urgent PIL, February05, 2007

Honorable President Of India Sh. APJ Abdul Kalam,

Honorable Prime Minister Of India,

Honorable Chief Justice Of India.


Cauvery Verdict- Gross Failure Of Judiciary & GOI

“Mischief In Tribunal Order”


Ravinder Singh, Inventor & Consultant, Y-77, Hauz Khas, New Delhi-16

Respected Sir,

Cauvery verdict has yet again shamed people of India in not addressing our problems in humanitarian and just manner. This reflects poorly on the caliber of our constitutional heads in not addressing the interstate issue of sharing of Cauvery water wisely and judicially in 60 years and war like situation has been created. Even reasonably good orders are scandalized by “Mischief” in judicial verdicts.

Critical Observation;

1. For sixty years riparian people of Karnataka and Kerala were prevented from using the waters generated in their rivers by TN even as their population has gone up by nearly 3.5 times. But TN government all along demanded even more waters of Ganga than consumed by Ganga Basin people unmindful of the huge cost of $150b and inefficiency/non-viability.

2. It must be emphasized that TN farmers in Cauvery basin get over 1000 mm rains compared to 500 mm for Karnataka farmers. Rain god in showering good rains already twice blesses TN. There is no obstruction and hindrance in this and efficiency is 100%. Though rains are not predicted but farmers can adjust to rains and with the assistance of tube-wells get optimum crop yield. The Tribunal award announced today is;-

[New Delhi, Feb. 5: The Cauvery Water Diputes Tribunal has announced its verdict today. As per the verdict Tamil Nadu will get 419 tmcft water and Karnataka 270 tmcft. Kerala and Puducherry will get 30 tmcft and 9 tmcft water respectively. Actual release by Karnataka to Tamil Nadu to be 192 tmcft annually. http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/000200702051401.htm ]

3. Petitioner inventor who has studied all important documents and even studied some latest files of water use in TN, has firm belief “Mischief” of “Actual release by Karnataka to Tamil Nadu to be 192 tmcft annually” has scandalized this judgment completely. The wording of Tribunal ought to be “Entitlements Of TN  and Karnataka are 419 tmcf and 270 tmcf in Cauvery River and both states should co-operate in maximizing their entitlement under the guidance of a team of independent experts.”

4. It is important for constitution heads to remember that TN in run up to this judgment was using far more waters of Cauvery than allocated presently but food production from 3% of river waters of India diverted in to Cauvery delta region is just 0.4%, a sixth of Indian food production.

It is shocking that rice production in Cauvery delta area getting most of Cauvery waters in three districts (18,19,20) Thanjavur, Thiruvarur and Nagappattinam is only 0.8 million tons less than a tenth of Punjab. Importantly TMC of water is released from Mettur Dam alone and huge inflows from intermediate basin, the food productivity is absolutely pathetic in the world considering MS Swaminathan belongs to the region that has conned India for 50 years as farming expert. Average Cauveri basin flows are 20 maf and Karnataka is able to use 4-5 maf only and water available for Cauveri Delta is more than Indus waters allocated to Punjab that produces 25 million tons of wheat and rice. It is also important to mention that these three districts get 50% of canal irrigation.


5. Cauvery dispute has restricted development of agriculture in Karnataka over 60 years and TN that has substantial access to most of Cauvery waters produces too little food in using Cauvery waters. Food production of only 0.8 million tones in using Caveri Waters against average TN requirement of 12 million tones and by global average 24 million tones approximately.

6. There is total absence of statesmanship of the parties and wisdom in humanly addressing the issue. Everything our constitutional heads need to know in resolving the cauvery issue was taught to the petitioner at age five by his grand father.

[Petitioner asked his wise grand father in 1960 during visit to his ancestral village in post wheat harvest in month of May “Why You Have Put Under Cultivation Only 20%? – He Explained In Detail The Water Resources In Persian Wheels Are Just Enough To Irrigate And Raise Crops On 20% Area In May June months Of Dry Summer, Crops On Will Be Raised On Rest Of Area Coinciding With Monsoon Rains ”. He also explained on persistent questioning how water dries up in the well and losses of water in canals go on increasing with length.”]

7. But this judgment has come at a time when global warming concerns are real and petroleum prices have shot past vegetable oil prices. Developed countries have diverted food products like corn and wheat for ethanol production and using soybean, canola and palm oil as diesel substitute. Therefore for food security it is absolutely for desirable to optimize food production and water used linked to food production.

8. Mischief in the Order like in Narmada Award where in 9 maf water is allocate to Gujarat but in other clauses Gujarat was actually allowed to use over 20 maf of water. Such kind of mischief by corrupt or incompetent judges leads to over designing waste of resources, future conflicts and eventually wastes of resources, conflicts and mismanagement.

Interim Remedy;

Based On My Understanding Of The Cauvery Dispute modifying just two line will substantially correct the deficiencies in present Tribunal Award;

A. “Actual release by Karnataka to Tamil Nadu to be 192 tmcft annually” be replaced by

— “Actual release by Karnataka to Tamil Nadu to be 192 tmcft in normal year, lesser when TN gets more than 419 tmcf of water in above average rainy season and more when Karnataka has excess to spare in above average rainy season.”  

B. Both states are situated on Indian coastline therefore get substantial rains many times in a short period and in many years get up to 150% of normal rain but not enough storages to capture most of this water.

— “All Cauvery Basin states are permitted to raise storages to 60% of the inflows in the catchments of the future dams.”


C. Productivity linked water use policy is essential to double the food production to achieve world average food production. (Food-grains consumption of 300 gms/day) It will not be long before more responsible government in near future may introduce improved water policy.

D. The Cauvery Tribunal has wrongly restrained upper basin states from optimally using their riparian waters.

E. Function of Judiciary under the constitution is to ensure equitable, productive and judicial use of river waters, which is partly addressed by modifying just one line deleting the mischief.

F. Though the figure of water release mandated for Karnataka is 192 tmcf against 205 tmcf previously but average releases at Stanley reservoir were 330 tmcf. Thus by the time new policy is introduced Karnataka will use 138 tmcf more water and TN shall get 13 tmcf less.

G. TN is overjoyed in getting 192 tmcf and Karnataka should be able to do that.


Thank you,

(Ravinder Singh)


February 6, 2007 Posted by | Bangalore, Karnataka and Kannada, Nanjundappa Report | 3 Comments

Yahoo! Our City – Bangalore

  Yahoo! Our City – Bangalore

Sent BY: “aravindswami” <aravindswami@yahoo.com>

Source: http://libranlover.blogspot.com/2007/02/yahoo-our-city-bangalore.html

Yahoo! has started a new Our City portal. Right now, it is in beta and only available on Yahoo’s India site (yahoo.in) for Bangalore (http://ourcity.yahoo.in/bangalore/home) and New Delhi.

This new effort by Yahoo! is a great example of what a localized web portal should be. The best thing about this site is that it is a mash-up, weaving together information from a variety of sources, including and not limited to, Wikipedia, Yahoo! News, Upcoming.org (for events), del.icio.us (for bookmarks), The Weather Channel, various blog sources including Bangalore Metblogs and Flickr (for photos).

Since the information on this local portal is culled from many different sources which are constantly updated, it ensures that the portal always presents fresh information to visitors. Too bad that there is still no worthy online mapping application for Indian cities. It would have been a perfect fit here.

My favorite part of the site is Kannada World (http://ourcity.yahoo.in/bangalore/kannada). At a time when many organizations and individuals in/about Bangalore easily forget Kannada, it is heartening to see Yahoo! put in a special Kannada section. Way to win the hearts of local people. The next step on the portal is to change all references to Bangalore to Bengalooru. 🙂

Source: http://libranlover.blogspot.com/2007/02/yahoo-our-city-bangalore.html

February 2, 2007 Posted by | Bangalore, Karnataka and Kannada, Nanjundappa Report | 1 Comment



ನಾ ಯೇನ ಅರಮಾನಿ ಕೇಳಿದ್ನೇನು
ಅರಮನಿಯಾಗ್ ಕೂತು ಮಾರಾಣಿಯಂಗ್
ಮೆರಿಯೋ ದರ್ದು ನನಗಿಲ್ ನೋಡು..
ನಾ ಯೇನ ಸೋನ ಚಾಂದಿ ಬೇಡಿದ್ನೇನು
ಇವತ್ತಿದ್ ನಾಳಿ ಮಣ್ಣಾಗ್ ಮಣ್ಣಾಗಿ
ಹೋಗೊ ಗರ್ತಿ ಇದ್ದೀನ್ ನಾನು..
ನಾ ಕೇಳಿದ್ದೊಂದ…..ಬೇಡಿದ್ದೊಂದ ನಿನಗ
ಶಿವನಾ ನನ್ ಮಡ್ಲಾಗ ಒಂದು ಕಂದಮ್ಮನನ್ನ ಹಾಕೊ……

ಸುತ್ ಮುತ್ ಹತ್ತ್ ಹಳ್ಯಾಗ
ಹೇಳ್ಲಿಕ್ ಹತ್ಯಾರಂತ…ಮ್ಯಾಗಿನ್ ಮನಿ
ಸೀತಮ್ಮನ್ ಸೊಸಿ ಬಂಜೆ ಅಂತ…
ಮೊನ್ನಿ ಕೂಡ ಶಾರ್ದಕ್ಕನ ಮನಿಯಾಗ ಲಕ್ಷ್ಮಿ
ಪೂಜೆ ಇತ್ತು.. ಪುಣ್ಯಾತ್ ಗಿತ್ತಿ ನನ್ ಹಣಿ ಮ್ಯಾಗ
ಒಂದು ಬೊಟ್ಟು, ಕುಂಕುಮ ಇಡ್ಲಿಲ್ಲ..ನೋಡು
ನನ್ ಮಡ್ಲಾಗ ನಾಲ್ಕ್ ಅಕ್ಕಿ ಕಾಳ್ ಹಾಕ್ಲಿಲ್ ನೋಡು
ಅದ್ಕಾ ನಾನ್ ಕೇಳಿದ್ದು ಶಿವನಾ ನನ್ ಮಡ್ಲಾಗ ಒಂದು ಕಂದಮ್ಮನನ್ನ ಹಾಕೊ…..

ಊರ ಗರತೇರ ಮಡ್ಲಾಗ್ ನೋಡಲ್ಲಿ
ಬೆಳ್ಳಿ ಚಂದ್ರಾಮನಂಗ ಕಂದ ನಗುತಾನ
ನೀರ್ ತರೋಣಾಂತ ಹೊರಾಗ್ ಹೋದ್ರ..
**ಎನ್ ತಂಗೀ ನಿನ್ ಹೊಟ್ಟಿ ಸಣ್ಣಾಕೈತಿ
ಇನ್ನು ಉಂಡಿಲ್ಲೇನ** ಅನ್ಕೋತ ಮಂದಿ ನಗತಾರ
ಗಂಡಾ ಆದೋನು ಹೊಟ್ಟಿ ಮ್ಯಾಲ್ ಒದಿತಾನ…….
ಅತ್ತಿ ಅಂತು ಕಣ್ಣಾಗ ಕೊಲ್ತಾಳ ನೋಡು………..
ನಾ ಬೇಡೋದ್ ಒಂದಾ ನಿನಗಾ-ಶಿವನೇ ನನಗ ಕಂದಾ ಬೇಕೋ

ಅಳ್ಲಿಕ್ ಕಣ್ಣಾಗ ಒಂದು ಹನಿ ನೀರಿಲ್ಲಿಲ್ಲಿ
ಆದ್ರ ಹಾಲ್ನಂತ ಕಂದನ ಮ್ಯಾಗ
ಆಸೆ ಉಕ್ಕುತೈತಿ ನೊಡ.. ಒಡಲಾಗ ಜಲಪಾತ ಐತೇನ?
ಮಾರಿ ಮ್ಯಾಗ ನಗೆ ಮೂಡಿ ಯೇಸ್ ದಿವ್ಸ ಆಯ್ತೋ
ಆದ್ರ ಮನದಾಗ ಆಸೆ ಬಳ್ಳಿ ಹಬ್ಬುತೈತಿ….. ಆಸರೆ ಆಕ್ತಿಯೇನ?
ಬಂಜಿ ಬಾಳ್ ಸಾಕಾಗೈತಿ, ಗಂಡನ ಒದಿ ಸಾಕಾಗೈತಿ
ಮತ್ತೊಮ್ಮಿ ಜೀವ ಬೇಡ್ಲಿಕ್ ಹತ್ತೈತಿ..
ಶಿವನಾನ॒ನಗ ಕಂದ ಬೇಕೇ ಬೇಕಪ್ಪಾ ನನಗ

ಊರಿನ್ ಗರತೇರ ಮಾರಿಗ್ ಹೊಡಿಯೋದ್ ಬ್ಯಾಡೇನು!
ಅತ್ತೀಗ್ ನಾ ಉತ್ರಾ ಕೊಡೋದ್ ಬ್ಯಾಡೇನು!
ಊರಾಗ ನಾ ಮಾರಿ ಎತ್ತಿ ತಿರ್ಗಾಡೋದ್ ಬ್ಯಾಡ್ವೇನು!
ಮತ್ತ ಲಕ್ಶ್ಮಿ ಪೂಜ್ಯಾಗ ..ನನ್ ಹಣಿ ಮ್ಯಾಗ ಕುಂಕುಮಾ ಮೂಡೋದ್ ಬ್ಯಾಡ್ವೇನು!
ನನ್ ಮಡ್ಲಾಗ ನಾಲ್ಕ್ ಅಕ್ಕಿ ಕಾಳ್ ಬೀಳೋದ್ ಬ್ಯಾಡ್ವೇನು
ಶಿವನೇ ನಿನ್ ರಟ್ಟಿ ಹಿಡಿದ್ ಕೇಳ್ಲಿಕ್ ಹತ್ತೀನಿ ನನಗ ಒಂದು ಕಂದ ಬೇಕೋ

February 1, 2007 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment