Inter State Water Disputes, Reasons, Legal Framework, Challenges

Inter State Water Disputes in India arise when two or more states contest the sharing, control, or use of river waters flowing across political boundaries. India has 25 major river basins, many spanning multiple states, making water a deeply federal and political issue. With agriculture consuming nearly 80% of freshwater, rising population, urbanisation, industrial demand, and climate variability, water stress has intensified disputes. These conflicts affect food security, drinking water availability, interstate relations, and cooperative federalism. Effective resolution is therefore critical for economic stability, social harmony, and ecological sustainability in India.

Inter State Water Disputes Reasons

Inter State Water Disputes emerge from structural, geographical, political, and institutional factors that shape water access, demand, and governance across states.

• Asymmetric River Access: Upstream states enjoy natural control over river flows, often constructing dams or barrages that reduce water availability for downstream states during lean seasons.
• Non Basin Based State Boundaries: State reorganisation after independence ignored river basin boundaries, splitting single rivers across multiple states and complicating integrated and scientific water management.
• Rising Water Demand: Population growth, Green Revolution agriculture, urban expansion, and industrialisation since the 1960s have sharply increased demand for irrigation, drinking, and industrial water.
• Unilateral Development Projects: States often build dams, reservoirs, or diversion canals without downstream consent, as seen in Cauvery, Krishna, and Mahanadi basins.
• Fragmented Water Governance: Water is a State List subject, but inter state rivers involve the Union, leading to overlapping authority and lack of coordinated decision making.
• Poor Hydrological Data Sharing: Absence of uniform, transparent, and mutually accepted river flow data creates mistrust and weakens the basis for fair adjudication.
• Climate Variability: Erratic monsoons, frequent droughts, and extreme floods due to climate change increase uncertainty and intensify competition over limited water resources.
• Politicisation of Water: Water disputes are often used as electoral tools, transforming technical issues into emotive regional and identity based conflicts.

Inter State Water Disputes Legal Frameworks

India has a constitutional and statutory framework to resolve inter state river water disputes, balancing state autonomy with national interest.

• Article 262 of Constitution: Empowers Parliament to legislate adjudication of inter state river disputes and bars court jurisdiction once such laws are enacted.
• Entry 17 State List: Gives states authority over water supply, irrigation, canals, and hydropower, subject to Union powers over inter state rivers.
• Entry 56 Union List: Allows Parliament to regulate and develop inter state rivers in public interest, forming the constitutional basis for central intervention.
• Inter State River Water Disputes Act 1956: Enables states to request the Union government to constitute tribunals for binding adjudication of disputes.
• River Boards Act 1956: Provides for river basin boards for coordinated management, though no river board has been effectively operationalised.
• 2002 Amendment to ISRWD Act: Introduced time limits of one year for tribunal formation and three years for award delivery, based on Sarkaria Commission recommendations.
• Dispute Resolution Committees: Recent reforms mandate pre tribunal negotiation through committees to encourage amicable settlement.
• Inter State River Water Disputes Amendment Bill 2019: Proposes a permanent tribunal with multiple benches, fixed timelines, and a central data bank.
• Judicial Interpretation: Supreme Court cannot adjudicate disputes directly but can interpret tribunal awards and ensure their implementation.

‹ ›

Inter State Water Disputes in India List

India has witnessed multiple major Inter State Water Disputes involving key river basins affecting millions of people.

1. Cauvery River Dispute: Involves Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Puducherry, with allocation disputes managed through CWMA and CWRC post Supreme Court verdict.
2. Krishna River Dispute: Concerns Maharashtra, Karnataka, Telangana, and Andhra Pradesh, with tribunal awards and ongoing disagreements over project utilisation.
3. Ravi Beas Dispute: Between Punjab, Haryana, and Rajasthan, centred on Sutlej Yamuna Link Canal, with tribunal awards facing political resistance.
4. Mahanadi Dispute: Between Odisha and Chhattisgarh over dam operations and non-monsoon releases, with MWDT formed in 2018 and report due by December 2025.
5. Godavari River Dispute: Involves Maharashtra, Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, and others, largely resolved through tribunal awards and inter state agreements.
6. Mahadayi Mandovi Dispute: Between Karnataka, Goa, and Maharashtra over diversion projects, with tribunal award still contested by states.
7. Narmada Dispute: Between Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra, and Rajasthan, resolved through Narmada Water Disputes Tribunal after nine years.
8. Vamsadhara Dispute: Between Andhra Pradesh and Odisha over dam height and water sharing, involving tribunal and judicial intervention.

Inter State Water Disputes Challenges

Resolving inter state water disputes faces persistent challenges, requiring institutional reform, cooperation, and scientific governance.

• Delay in Tribunal Constitution: States often wait decades for tribunal formation, as seen in the Cauvery tribunal set up in 1990 after long pending demands.
• Prolonged Award Delivery: Tribunals frequently exceed mandated timelines, with disputes like Godavari taking nearly ten years for final awards.
• Delay in Award Notification: Even after decisions, publication in the Official Gazette is delayed, weakening enforcement and creating uncertainty among states.
• Weak Enforcement Mechanism: Tribunal awards lack strong institutional enforcement, allowing states to delay or partially comply without immediate consequences.
• Politicisation of Water Issues: Water disputes are often driven by electoral politics, regional identity, and vote bank considerations rather than scientific assessment.
• Fragmented Institutional Framework: Multiple agencies at Union and State levels operate without coordination, preventing integrated river basin management.
• Absence of Multidisciplinary Expertise: Tribunals mainly consist of judges, with limited involvement of hydrologists, environmentalists, and climate experts.
• Lack of Reliable Data: Non-uniform river flow measurement and absence of a central data repository generate mistrust among disputing states.
• Judicial Interventions: Frequent appeals to the Supreme Court delay implementation, despite Article 262 restricting judicial jurisdiction over disputes.
• Environmental Stress: Over extraction, dam construction, and pollution degrade river ecosystems, reducing total available water for equitable sharing.
• Climate Change Impact: Erratic monsoon patterns, droughts, and floods make historical water sharing formulas increasingly unreliable.

Way Forward:

• Strengthening Cooperative Federalism: The Union government should actively mediate disputes, encouraging consensus based solutions rather than adversarial litigation.
• Permanent Tribunal System: Establishing a single standing tribunal with multiple benches can ensure faster adjudication and institutional continuity.
• Strict Timelines Enforcement: Tribunal formation, award delivery, and notification must strictly follow legally defined deadlines.
• River Basin Authorities: Statutory basin level bodies should manage rivers holistically, integrating surface water, groundwater, and ecological needs.
• Centralised Water Data Bank: A national repository with real time hydrological data can improve transparency and trust among riparian states.
• Use of Technology and AI: Advanced modelling, satellite monitoring, and AI based forecasting can support objective water allocation decisions.
• Stakeholder Participation: Farmers, local communities, industries, and civil society should be included in planning and decision making processes.
• Water Use Efficiency Measures: Promotion of drip irrigation, crop diversification, and wastewater reuse can reduce inter state competition.
• Climate Resilient Frameworks: Water sharing agreements must incorporate climate variability and future hydrological uncertainties.
• Strengthening Inter State Council: Bringing disputes under Article 263 forums can facilitate dialogue and non-adversarial resolution mechanisms.
• Legal Reforms: Amendments to the Inter State River Water Disputes Act should strengthen enforcement and compliance mechanisms.
• Environmental Safeguards: River health, environmental flows, and biodiversity protection must be integral to dispute resolution frameworks.