Notes: Inter State River Water Disputes | Political Science & International Relations: Mains Optional - UPSC PDF Download

 Page 1


 
Mechanisms of Inter
Inter-State Water Disputes:
India is facing a major water crisis as stated by numerous reports and 
organisations. According to the Central Water Commission, India’s per capita 
water availability in 1991 was 2,210 cubic metres per year, which dwindled to 
1,651 in 2011. A level as low as this
The projected figure for 2051 is pegged lower at 1,228 cubic metres.
According to the Composite Water Management Index (CWMI) report released 
by the Niti Aayog in 2018, 21 major cities (Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai, 
Hyderabad and others) are racing to reach zero groundwater levels by 2020, 
affecting access for 100 million
a new Jal Shakti (water) ministry, which aims at tackling water issues with a 
holistic and integrated perspective on the subject. The ministry has announced 
an ambitious plan to provide piped water connections to every household in 
India by 2024. 
However, 12 per cent of India’s population is already living the 'Day Zero' 
scenario, thanks to excessive groundwater pumping, an inefficient and wasteful 
water management system and years of deficient rains. The CWMI report also 
states that by 2030, the country's water demand is projected to be twice the 
available supply, implying severe water scarcity for hundreds of millions of 
people and an eventual six per cent loss in the country's GDP.
context that one needs to analyse the disputes regarding the inter
Water is a state subject via Entry 17 of State List, thus states are empowered to 
enact legislation on subject of water. But this entry is subject to the provisions 
of Entry 56 of Union List. The specific provisions in this regard are as under:
? Entry 56- Regulation and development of inter
valleys to the extent to which such regulation and development under 
the control of the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be
expedient in the public interest.
? Entry 17- Water that is to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, 
drainage and embankments, water storage and water power subject to 
the provisions of Entry 56 of List 
 
Mechanisms of Inter-state relations: 
Disputes:  
India is facing a major water crisis as stated by numerous reports and 
According to the Central Water Commission, India’s per capita 
water availability in 1991 was 2,210 cubic metres per year, which dwindled to 
1,651 in 2011. A level as low as this, is regarded as a ‘water-stressed’ condition. 
ected figure for 2051 is pegged lower at 1,228 cubic metres. 
According to the Composite Water Management Index (CWMI) report released 
by the Niti Aayog in 2018, 21 major cities (Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai, 
Hyderabad and others) are racing to reach zero groundwater levels by 2020, 
affecting access for 100 million people. The Union government recently formed 
a new Jal Shakti (water) ministry, which aims at tackling water issues with a 
holistic and integrated perspective on the subject. The ministry has announced 
an ambitious plan to provide piped water connections to every household in 
However, 12 per cent of India’s population is already living the 'Day Zero' 
scenario, thanks to excessive groundwater pumping, an inefficient and wasteful 
water management system and years of deficient rains. The CWMI report also 
030, the country's water demand is projected to be twice the 
available supply, implying severe water scarcity for hundreds of millions of 
people and an eventual six per cent loss in the country's GDP. It is under this 
context that one needs to analyse the disputes regarding the inter-state rivers. 
Water is a state subject via Entry 17 of State List, thus states are empowered to 
enact legislation on subject of water. But this entry is subject to the provisions 
. The specific provisions in this regard are as under:
Regulation and development of inter-State rivers and river 
valleys to the extent to which such regulation and development under 
the control of the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be
expedient in the public interest. 
Water that is to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, 
drainage and embankments, water storage and water power subject to 
the provisions of Entry 56 of List – I. 
India is facing a major water crisis as stated by numerous reports and 
According to the Central Water Commission, India’s per capita 
water availability in 1991 was 2,210 cubic metres per year, which dwindled to 
stressed’ condition. 
 
According to the Composite Water Management Index (CWMI) report released 
by the Niti Aayog in 2018, 21 major cities (Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai, 
Hyderabad and others) are racing to reach zero groundwater levels by 2020, 
ntly formed 
a new Jal Shakti (water) ministry, which aims at tackling water issues with a 
holistic and integrated perspective on the subject. The ministry has announced 
an ambitious plan to provide piped water connections to every household in 
However, 12 per cent of India’s population is already living the 'Day Zero' 
scenario, thanks to excessive groundwater pumping, an inefficient and wasteful 
water management system and years of deficient rains. The CWMI report also 
030, the country's water demand is projected to be twice the 
available supply, implying severe water scarcity for hundreds of millions of 
It is under this 
state rivers.  
Water is a state subject via Entry 17 of State List, thus states are empowered to 
enact legislation on subject of water. But this entry is subject to the provisions 
. The specific provisions in this regard are as under: 
State rivers and river 
valleys to the extent to which such regulation and development under 
the control of the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be 
Water that is to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, 
drainage and embankments, water storage and water power subject to 
Page 2


 
Mechanisms of Inter
Inter-State Water Disputes:
India is facing a major water crisis as stated by numerous reports and 
organisations. According to the Central Water Commission, India’s per capita 
water availability in 1991 was 2,210 cubic metres per year, which dwindled to 
1,651 in 2011. A level as low as this
The projected figure for 2051 is pegged lower at 1,228 cubic metres.
According to the Composite Water Management Index (CWMI) report released 
by the Niti Aayog in 2018, 21 major cities (Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai, 
Hyderabad and others) are racing to reach zero groundwater levels by 2020, 
affecting access for 100 million
a new Jal Shakti (water) ministry, which aims at tackling water issues with a 
holistic and integrated perspective on the subject. The ministry has announced 
an ambitious plan to provide piped water connections to every household in 
India by 2024. 
However, 12 per cent of India’s population is already living the 'Day Zero' 
scenario, thanks to excessive groundwater pumping, an inefficient and wasteful 
water management system and years of deficient rains. The CWMI report also 
states that by 2030, the country's water demand is projected to be twice the 
available supply, implying severe water scarcity for hundreds of millions of 
people and an eventual six per cent loss in the country's GDP.
context that one needs to analyse the disputes regarding the inter
Water is a state subject via Entry 17 of State List, thus states are empowered to 
enact legislation on subject of water. But this entry is subject to the provisions 
of Entry 56 of Union List. The specific provisions in this regard are as under:
? Entry 56- Regulation and development of inter
valleys to the extent to which such regulation and development under 
the control of the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be
expedient in the public interest.
? Entry 17- Water that is to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, 
drainage and embankments, water storage and water power subject to 
the provisions of Entry 56 of List 
 
Mechanisms of Inter-state relations: 
Disputes:  
India is facing a major water crisis as stated by numerous reports and 
According to the Central Water Commission, India’s per capita 
water availability in 1991 was 2,210 cubic metres per year, which dwindled to 
1,651 in 2011. A level as low as this, is regarded as a ‘water-stressed’ condition. 
ected figure for 2051 is pegged lower at 1,228 cubic metres. 
According to the Composite Water Management Index (CWMI) report released 
by the Niti Aayog in 2018, 21 major cities (Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai, 
Hyderabad and others) are racing to reach zero groundwater levels by 2020, 
affecting access for 100 million people. The Union government recently formed 
a new Jal Shakti (water) ministry, which aims at tackling water issues with a 
holistic and integrated perspective on the subject. The ministry has announced 
an ambitious plan to provide piped water connections to every household in 
However, 12 per cent of India’s population is already living the 'Day Zero' 
scenario, thanks to excessive groundwater pumping, an inefficient and wasteful 
water management system and years of deficient rains. The CWMI report also 
030, the country's water demand is projected to be twice the 
available supply, implying severe water scarcity for hundreds of millions of 
people and an eventual six per cent loss in the country's GDP. It is under this 
context that one needs to analyse the disputes regarding the inter-state rivers. 
Water is a state subject via Entry 17 of State List, thus states are empowered to 
enact legislation on subject of water. But this entry is subject to the provisions 
. The specific provisions in this regard are as under:
Regulation and development of inter-State rivers and river 
valleys to the extent to which such regulation and development under 
the control of the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be
expedient in the public interest. 
Water that is to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, 
drainage and embankments, water storage and water power subject to 
the provisions of Entry 56 of List – I. 
India is facing a major water crisis as stated by numerous reports and 
According to the Central Water Commission, India’s per capita 
water availability in 1991 was 2,210 cubic metres per year, which dwindled to 
stressed’ condition. 
 
According to the Composite Water Management Index (CWMI) report released 
by the Niti Aayog in 2018, 21 major cities (Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai, 
Hyderabad and others) are racing to reach zero groundwater levels by 2020, 
ntly formed 
a new Jal Shakti (water) ministry, which aims at tackling water issues with a 
holistic and integrated perspective on the subject. The ministry has announced 
an ambitious plan to provide piped water connections to every household in 
However, 12 per cent of India’s population is already living the 'Day Zero' 
scenario, thanks to excessive groundwater pumping, an inefficient and wasteful 
water management system and years of deficient rains. The CWMI report also 
030, the country's water demand is projected to be twice the 
available supply, implying severe water scarcity for hundreds of millions of 
It is under this 
state rivers.  
Water is a state subject via Entry 17 of State List, thus states are empowered to 
enact legislation on subject of water. But this entry is subject to the provisions 
. The specific provisions in this regard are as under: 
State rivers and river 
valleys to the extent to which such regulation and development under 
the control of the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be 
Water that is to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, 
drainage and embankments, water storage and water power subject to 
 
? Seervai-Parliament controls matters of nati
control those of local interest keeping in mind the federal nature of the 
Indian state.  
? At the same time, the Articles 131 and 136 of the Constitution have 
been used by the States frequently for bringing the matters related to 
inter-State rivers before the Supreme Court via the Special Leave 
Petitions. Further, Article 143(1) of the Constitution has been used by 
the Central Government (via President) for seeking opinion of the 
Supreme Court on the matters related to inter
advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
Constitutional Mandate and History: 
Article 262 of the Constitution provides for the adjudication of inter
disputes. It makes two provisions:
? Parliament may by law provide for the a
complaint with respect to the use, distribution and control of waters of 
any inter-state river and river valley.
? Parliament may also provide that neither the Supreme Court nor any 
other court is to exercise jurisdiction in res
complaint. 
? GOI 1919- Water as a provincial subject but all power vested in the 
Viceroy. The Union Government retained the power to intervene or 
over-ride provincial authorities. 
? GOI 1935- Sections 130 and 131 dealt with dispute
between the provinces. The government from any province or ruler 
could complain to the GG who could form a commission and take a 
decision accordingly. The remedy to the decision of GG was with His 
Majesty in Council.
Parliamentary enactments:
? The River Boards Act (1956):
river boards for the regulation and development of inter
river valleys. A river board is establis
the request of the state governments concerned t
 
Parliament controls matters of national interest, while states 
control those of local interest keeping in mind the federal nature of the 
At the same time, the Articles 131 and 136 of the Constitution have 
been used by the States frequently for bringing the matters related to 
State rivers before the Supreme Court via the Special Leave 
Petitions. Further, Article 143(1) of the Constitution has been used by 
the Central Government (via President) for seeking opinion of the 
Supreme Court on the matters related to inter-State rivers, under the 
advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. 
Constitutional Mandate and History:  
Article 262 of the Constitution provides for the adjudication of inter-
disputes. It makes two provisions: 
Parliament may by law provide for the adjudication of any dispute or 
complaint with respect to the use, distribution and control of waters of 
state river and river valley. 
Parliament may also provide that neither the Supreme Court nor any 
other court is to exercise jurisdiction in respect of any such dispute or 
Water as a provincial subject but all power vested in the 
Viceroy. The Union Government retained the power to intervene or 
ride provincial authorities.  
Sections 130 and 131 dealt with disputes relating to water 
between the provinces. The government from any province or ruler 
could complain to the GG who could form a commission and take a 
decision accordingly. The remedy to the decision of GG was with His 
Majesty in Council. 
Parliamentary enactments: 
The River Boards Act (1956): The Act provides for the establishment of 
river boards for the regulation and development of inter-state river and 
river valleys. A river board is established by the Central government on 
the request of the state governments concerned to advise them. 
onal interest, while states 
control those of local interest keeping in mind the federal nature of the 
At the same time, the Articles 131 and 136 of the Constitution have 
been used by the States frequently for bringing the matters related to 
State rivers before the Supreme Court via the Special Leave 
Petitions. Further, Article 143(1) of the Constitution has been used by 
the Central Government (via President) for seeking opinion of the 
rivers, under the 
-state water 
djudication of any dispute or 
complaint with respect to the use, distribution and control of waters of 
Parliament may also provide that neither the Supreme Court nor any 
pect of any such dispute or 
Water as a provincial subject but all power vested in the 
Viceroy. The Union Government retained the power to intervene or 
s relating to water 
between the provinces. The government from any province or ruler 
could complain to the GG who could form a commission and take a 
decision accordingly. The remedy to the decision of GG was with His 
The Act provides for the establishment of 
state river and 
hed by the Central government on 
o advise them.  
Page 3


 
Mechanisms of Inter
Inter-State Water Disputes:
India is facing a major water crisis as stated by numerous reports and 
organisations. According to the Central Water Commission, India’s per capita 
water availability in 1991 was 2,210 cubic metres per year, which dwindled to 
1,651 in 2011. A level as low as this
The projected figure for 2051 is pegged lower at 1,228 cubic metres.
According to the Composite Water Management Index (CWMI) report released 
by the Niti Aayog in 2018, 21 major cities (Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai, 
Hyderabad and others) are racing to reach zero groundwater levels by 2020, 
affecting access for 100 million
a new Jal Shakti (water) ministry, which aims at tackling water issues with a 
holistic and integrated perspective on the subject. The ministry has announced 
an ambitious plan to provide piped water connections to every household in 
India by 2024. 
However, 12 per cent of India’s population is already living the 'Day Zero' 
scenario, thanks to excessive groundwater pumping, an inefficient and wasteful 
water management system and years of deficient rains. The CWMI report also 
states that by 2030, the country's water demand is projected to be twice the 
available supply, implying severe water scarcity for hundreds of millions of 
people and an eventual six per cent loss in the country's GDP.
context that one needs to analyse the disputes regarding the inter
Water is a state subject via Entry 17 of State List, thus states are empowered to 
enact legislation on subject of water. But this entry is subject to the provisions 
of Entry 56 of Union List. The specific provisions in this regard are as under:
? Entry 56- Regulation and development of inter
valleys to the extent to which such regulation and development under 
the control of the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be
expedient in the public interest.
? Entry 17- Water that is to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, 
drainage and embankments, water storage and water power subject to 
the provisions of Entry 56 of List 
 
Mechanisms of Inter-state relations: 
Disputes:  
India is facing a major water crisis as stated by numerous reports and 
According to the Central Water Commission, India’s per capita 
water availability in 1991 was 2,210 cubic metres per year, which dwindled to 
1,651 in 2011. A level as low as this, is regarded as a ‘water-stressed’ condition. 
ected figure for 2051 is pegged lower at 1,228 cubic metres. 
According to the Composite Water Management Index (CWMI) report released 
by the Niti Aayog in 2018, 21 major cities (Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai, 
Hyderabad and others) are racing to reach zero groundwater levels by 2020, 
affecting access for 100 million people. The Union government recently formed 
a new Jal Shakti (water) ministry, which aims at tackling water issues with a 
holistic and integrated perspective on the subject. The ministry has announced 
an ambitious plan to provide piped water connections to every household in 
However, 12 per cent of India’s population is already living the 'Day Zero' 
scenario, thanks to excessive groundwater pumping, an inefficient and wasteful 
water management system and years of deficient rains. The CWMI report also 
030, the country's water demand is projected to be twice the 
available supply, implying severe water scarcity for hundreds of millions of 
people and an eventual six per cent loss in the country's GDP. It is under this 
context that one needs to analyse the disputes regarding the inter-state rivers. 
Water is a state subject via Entry 17 of State List, thus states are empowered to 
enact legislation on subject of water. But this entry is subject to the provisions 
. The specific provisions in this regard are as under:
Regulation and development of inter-State rivers and river 
valleys to the extent to which such regulation and development under 
the control of the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be
expedient in the public interest. 
Water that is to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, 
drainage and embankments, water storage and water power subject to 
the provisions of Entry 56 of List – I. 
India is facing a major water crisis as stated by numerous reports and 
According to the Central Water Commission, India’s per capita 
water availability in 1991 was 2,210 cubic metres per year, which dwindled to 
stressed’ condition. 
 
According to the Composite Water Management Index (CWMI) report released 
by the Niti Aayog in 2018, 21 major cities (Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai, 
Hyderabad and others) are racing to reach zero groundwater levels by 2020, 
ntly formed 
a new Jal Shakti (water) ministry, which aims at tackling water issues with a 
holistic and integrated perspective on the subject. The ministry has announced 
an ambitious plan to provide piped water connections to every household in 
However, 12 per cent of India’s population is already living the 'Day Zero' 
scenario, thanks to excessive groundwater pumping, an inefficient and wasteful 
water management system and years of deficient rains. The CWMI report also 
030, the country's water demand is projected to be twice the 
available supply, implying severe water scarcity for hundreds of millions of 
It is under this 
state rivers.  
Water is a state subject via Entry 17 of State List, thus states are empowered to 
enact legislation on subject of water. But this entry is subject to the provisions 
. The specific provisions in this regard are as under: 
State rivers and river 
valleys to the extent to which such regulation and development under 
the control of the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be 
Water that is to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, 
drainage and embankments, water storage and water power subject to 
 
? Seervai-Parliament controls matters of nati
control those of local interest keeping in mind the federal nature of the 
Indian state.  
? At the same time, the Articles 131 and 136 of the Constitution have 
been used by the States frequently for bringing the matters related to 
inter-State rivers before the Supreme Court via the Special Leave 
Petitions. Further, Article 143(1) of the Constitution has been used by 
the Central Government (via President) for seeking opinion of the 
Supreme Court on the matters related to inter
advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
Constitutional Mandate and History: 
Article 262 of the Constitution provides for the adjudication of inter
disputes. It makes two provisions:
? Parliament may by law provide for the a
complaint with respect to the use, distribution and control of waters of 
any inter-state river and river valley.
? Parliament may also provide that neither the Supreme Court nor any 
other court is to exercise jurisdiction in res
complaint. 
? GOI 1919- Water as a provincial subject but all power vested in the 
Viceroy. The Union Government retained the power to intervene or 
over-ride provincial authorities. 
? GOI 1935- Sections 130 and 131 dealt with dispute
between the provinces. The government from any province or ruler 
could complain to the GG who could form a commission and take a 
decision accordingly. The remedy to the decision of GG was with His 
Majesty in Council.
Parliamentary enactments:
? The River Boards Act (1956):
river boards for the regulation and development of inter
river valleys. A river board is establis
the request of the state governments concerned t
 
Parliament controls matters of national interest, while states 
control those of local interest keeping in mind the federal nature of the 
At the same time, the Articles 131 and 136 of the Constitution have 
been used by the States frequently for bringing the matters related to 
State rivers before the Supreme Court via the Special Leave 
Petitions. Further, Article 143(1) of the Constitution has been used by 
the Central Government (via President) for seeking opinion of the 
Supreme Court on the matters related to inter-State rivers, under the 
advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. 
Constitutional Mandate and History:  
Article 262 of the Constitution provides for the adjudication of inter-
disputes. It makes two provisions: 
Parliament may by law provide for the adjudication of any dispute or 
complaint with respect to the use, distribution and control of waters of 
state river and river valley. 
Parliament may also provide that neither the Supreme Court nor any 
other court is to exercise jurisdiction in respect of any such dispute or 
Water as a provincial subject but all power vested in the 
Viceroy. The Union Government retained the power to intervene or 
ride provincial authorities.  
Sections 130 and 131 dealt with disputes relating to water 
between the provinces. The government from any province or ruler 
could complain to the GG who could form a commission and take a 
decision accordingly. The remedy to the decision of GG was with His 
Majesty in Council. 
Parliamentary enactments: 
The River Boards Act (1956): The Act provides for the establishment of 
river boards for the regulation and development of inter-state river and 
river valleys. A river board is established by the Central government on 
the request of the state governments concerned to advise them. 
onal interest, while states 
control those of local interest keeping in mind the federal nature of the 
At the same time, the Articles 131 and 136 of the Constitution have 
been used by the States frequently for bringing the matters related to 
State rivers before the Supreme Court via the Special Leave 
Petitions. Further, Article 143(1) of the Constitution has been used by 
the Central Government (via President) for seeking opinion of the 
rivers, under the 
-state water 
djudication of any dispute or 
complaint with respect to the use, distribution and control of waters of 
Parliament may also provide that neither the Supreme Court nor any 
pect of any such dispute or 
Water as a provincial subject but all power vested in the 
Viceroy. The Union Government retained the power to intervene or 
s relating to water 
between the provinces. The government from any province or ruler 
could complain to the GG who could form a commission and take a 
decision accordingly. The remedy to the decision of GG was with His 
The Act provides for the establishment of 
state river and 
hed by the Central government on 
o advise them.  
 
? The River Boards were supposed to prevent conflicts by preparing 
developmental schemes and working out the costs to each State. No water 
board, however, has so far been created under the River Boards Act, 
1956. National Commission for Review of
NCRWC, has observed that it is a fact that in relation to regulation and 
development of interstate waters, the River Boards Act, 1956 has 
remained a dead letter.
? Inter-State River Waters Dispute Act (1956):
Central government to set up an ad hoc tri
dispute between two or more states in relation to the waters of an inter
state river or river valley. The decision of the tribunal would be final and 
binding on the parties to the dispute. Neither the Supreme Court nor any 
other court is to have jurisdiction in respect of any water dispute which 
may be referred to such a tribunal under this Act. Main features of the 
act: 
1. It defines Water Disputes
2. Excludes such disputes from the jurisdiction of Supreme Court
3. Confers power on U
the same 
? Water Disputes- Disputes w.r.t. use, distribution and control of inter
rivers or valleys. State requests Union to refer dispute to tribunal. Only 
when Union govt is of the opinion that the same  
Scope of the IRWD Act: 
? IRWD Act is applicable only to interstate rivers / river valleys. If the 
action of one state affects the interests of one or more other states, then 
only water dispute is deemed to have arisen under IRWD Act. The action 
of the state can be of two types:
? Actions of a downstream state affecting the interest of an upstream state
? Actions of an upstream state affecting the interest of a downstream state
? Here we note that the action of the downstream state’s action can affect 
the upstream state only when the
barrage near the boundary or a submerging territory of the upstream state. 
 
The River Boards were supposed to prevent conflicts by preparing 
developmental schemes and working out the costs to each State. No water 
board, however, has so far been created under the River Boards Act, 
National Commission for Review of Working of the Constitution 
NCRWC, has observed that it is a fact that in relation to regulation and 
development of interstate waters, the River Boards Act, 1956 has 
remained a dead letter. 
State River Waters Dispute Act (1956):  This Act empowers the 
Central government to set up an ad hoc tribunal for the adjudication of a 
dispute between two or more states in relation to the waters of an inter
state river or river valley. The decision of the tribunal would be final and 
binding on the parties to the dispute. Neither the Supreme Court nor any 
ther court is to have jurisdiction in respect of any water dispute which 
may be referred to such a tribunal under this Act. Main features of the 
It defines Water Disputes 
Excludes such disputes from the jurisdiction of Supreme Court
Confers power on Union Govt. To constitute tribunals to resolve 
Disputes w.r.t. use, distribution and control of inter
rivers or valleys. State requests Union to refer dispute to tribunal. Only 
when Union govt is of the opinion that the same   
IRWD Act is applicable only to interstate rivers / river valleys. If the 
action of one state affects the interests of one or more other states, then 
only water dispute is deemed to have arisen under IRWD Act. The action 
of the state can be of two types: 
Actions of a downstream state affecting the interest of an upstream state
Actions of an upstream state affecting the interest of a downstream state
Here we note that the action of the downstream state’s action can affect 
the upstream state only when the downstream state is building a dam or 
barrage near the boundary or a submerging territory of the upstream state. 
The River Boards were supposed to prevent conflicts by preparing 
developmental schemes and working out the costs to each State. No water 
board, however, has so far been created under the River Boards Act, 
Working of the Constitution 
NCRWC, has observed that it is a fact that in relation to regulation and 
development of interstate waters, the River Boards Act, 1956 has 
This Act empowers the 
bunal for the adjudication of a 
dispute between two or more states in relation to the waters of an inter-
state river or river valley. The decision of the tribunal would be final and 
binding on the parties to the dispute. Neither the Supreme Court nor any 
ther court is to have jurisdiction in respect of any water dispute which 
may be referred to such a tribunal under this Act. Main features of the 
Excludes such disputes from the jurisdiction of Supreme Court 
nion Govt. To constitute tribunals to resolve 
Disputes w.r.t. use, distribution and control of inter-state 
rivers or valleys. State requests Union to refer dispute to tribunal. Only 
IRWD Act is applicable only to interstate rivers / river valleys. If the 
action of one state affects the interests of one or more other states, then 
only water dispute is deemed to have arisen under IRWD Act. The action 
Actions of a downstream state affecting the interest of an upstream state 
Actions of an upstream state affecting the interest of a downstream state 
Here we note that the action of the downstream state’s action can affect 
lding a dam or 
barrage near the boundary or a submerging territory of the upstream state. 
Page 4


 
Mechanisms of Inter
Inter-State Water Disputes:
India is facing a major water crisis as stated by numerous reports and 
organisations. According to the Central Water Commission, India’s per capita 
water availability in 1991 was 2,210 cubic metres per year, which dwindled to 
1,651 in 2011. A level as low as this
The projected figure for 2051 is pegged lower at 1,228 cubic metres.
According to the Composite Water Management Index (CWMI) report released 
by the Niti Aayog in 2018, 21 major cities (Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai, 
Hyderabad and others) are racing to reach zero groundwater levels by 2020, 
affecting access for 100 million
a new Jal Shakti (water) ministry, which aims at tackling water issues with a 
holistic and integrated perspective on the subject. The ministry has announced 
an ambitious plan to provide piped water connections to every household in 
India by 2024. 
However, 12 per cent of India’s population is already living the 'Day Zero' 
scenario, thanks to excessive groundwater pumping, an inefficient and wasteful 
water management system and years of deficient rains. The CWMI report also 
states that by 2030, the country's water demand is projected to be twice the 
available supply, implying severe water scarcity for hundreds of millions of 
people and an eventual six per cent loss in the country's GDP.
context that one needs to analyse the disputes regarding the inter
Water is a state subject via Entry 17 of State List, thus states are empowered to 
enact legislation on subject of water. But this entry is subject to the provisions 
of Entry 56 of Union List. The specific provisions in this regard are as under:
? Entry 56- Regulation and development of inter
valleys to the extent to which such regulation and development under 
the control of the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be
expedient in the public interest.
? Entry 17- Water that is to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, 
drainage and embankments, water storage and water power subject to 
the provisions of Entry 56 of List 
 
Mechanisms of Inter-state relations: 
Disputes:  
India is facing a major water crisis as stated by numerous reports and 
According to the Central Water Commission, India’s per capita 
water availability in 1991 was 2,210 cubic metres per year, which dwindled to 
1,651 in 2011. A level as low as this, is regarded as a ‘water-stressed’ condition. 
ected figure for 2051 is pegged lower at 1,228 cubic metres. 
According to the Composite Water Management Index (CWMI) report released 
by the Niti Aayog in 2018, 21 major cities (Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai, 
Hyderabad and others) are racing to reach zero groundwater levels by 2020, 
affecting access for 100 million people. The Union government recently formed 
a new Jal Shakti (water) ministry, which aims at tackling water issues with a 
holistic and integrated perspective on the subject. The ministry has announced 
an ambitious plan to provide piped water connections to every household in 
However, 12 per cent of India’s population is already living the 'Day Zero' 
scenario, thanks to excessive groundwater pumping, an inefficient and wasteful 
water management system and years of deficient rains. The CWMI report also 
030, the country's water demand is projected to be twice the 
available supply, implying severe water scarcity for hundreds of millions of 
people and an eventual six per cent loss in the country's GDP. It is under this 
context that one needs to analyse the disputes regarding the inter-state rivers. 
Water is a state subject via Entry 17 of State List, thus states are empowered to 
enact legislation on subject of water. But this entry is subject to the provisions 
. The specific provisions in this regard are as under:
Regulation and development of inter-State rivers and river 
valleys to the extent to which such regulation and development under 
the control of the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be
expedient in the public interest. 
Water that is to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, 
drainage and embankments, water storage and water power subject to 
the provisions of Entry 56 of List – I. 
India is facing a major water crisis as stated by numerous reports and 
According to the Central Water Commission, India’s per capita 
water availability in 1991 was 2,210 cubic metres per year, which dwindled to 
stressed’ condition. 
 
According to the Composite Water Management Index (CWMI) report released 
by the Niti Aayog in 2018, 21 major cities (Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai, 
Hyderabad and others) are racing to reach zero groundwater levels by 2020, 
ntly formed 
a new Jal Shakti (water) ministry, which aims at tackling water issues with a 
holistic and integrated perspective on the subject. The ministry has announced 
an ambitious plan to provide piped water connections to every household in 
However, 12 per cent of India’s population is already living the 'Day Zero' 
scenario, thanks to excessive groundwater pumping, an inefficient and wasteful 
water management system and years of deficient rains. The CWMI report also 
030, the country's water demand is projected to be twice the 
available supply, implying severe water scarcity for hundreds of millions of 
It is under this 
state rivers.  
Water is a state subject via Entry 17 of State List, thus states are empowered to 
enact legislation on subject of water. But this entry is subject to the provisions 
. The specific provisions in this regard are as under: 
State rivers and river 
valleys to the extent to which such regulation and development under 
the control of the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be 
Water that is to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, 
drainage and embankments, water storage and water power subject to 
 
? Seervai-Parliament controls matters of nati
control those of local interest keeping in mind the federal nature of the 
Indian state.  
? At the same time, the Articles 131 and 136 of the Constitution have 
been used by the States frequently for bringing the matters related to 
inter-State rivers before the Supreme Court via the Special Leave 
Petitions. Further, Article 143(1) of the Constitution has been used by 
the Central Government (via President) for seeking opinion of the 
Supreme Court on the matters related to inter
advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
Constitutional Mandate and History: 
Article 262 of the Constitution provides for the adjudication of inter
disputes. It makes two provisions:
? Parliament may by law provide for the a
complaint with respect to the use, distribution and control of waters of 
any inter-state river and river valley.
? Parliament may also provide that neither the Supreme Court nor any 
other court is to exercise jurisdiction in res
complaint. 
? GOI 1919- Water as a provincial subject but all power vested in the 
Viceroy. The Union Government retained the power to intervene or 
over-ride provincial authorities. 
? GOI 1935- Sections 130 and 131 dealt with dispute
between the provinces. The government from any province or ruler 
could complain to the GG who could form a commission and take a 
decision accordingly. The remedy to the decision of GG was with His 
Majesty in Council.
Parliamentary enactments:
? The River Boards Act (1956):
river boards for the regulation and development of inter
river valleys. A river board is establis
the request of the state governments concerned t
 
Parliament controls matters of national interest, while states 
control those of local interest keeping in mind the federal nature of the 
At the same time, the Articles 131 and 136 of the Constitution have 
been used by the States frequently for bringing the matters related to 
State rivers before the Supreme Court via the Special Leave 
Petitions. Further, Article 143(1) of the Constitution has been used by 
the Central Government (via President) for seeking opinion of the 
Supreme Court on the matters related to inter-State rivers, under the 
advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. 
Constitutional Mandate and History:  
Article 262 of the Constitution provides for the adjudication of inter-
disputes. It makes two provisions: 
Parliament may by law provide for the adjudication of any dispute or 
complaint with respect to the use, distribution and control of waters of 
state river and river valley. 
Parliament may also provide that neither the Supreme Court nor any 
other court is to exercise jurisdiction in respect of any such dispute or 
Water as a provincial subject but all power vested in the 
Viceroy. The Union Government retained the power to intervene or 
ride provincial authorities.  
Sections 130 and 131 dealt with disputes relating to water 
between the provinces. The government from any province or ruler 
could complain to the GG who could form a commission and take a 
decision accordingly. The remedy to the decision of GG was with His 
Majesty in Council. 
Parliamentary enactments: 
The River Boards Act (1956): The Act provides for the establishment of 
river boards for the regulation and development of inter-state river and 
river valleys. A river board is established by the Central government on 
the request of the state governments concerned to advise them. 
onal interest, while states 
control those of local interest keeping in mind the federal nature of the 
At the same time, the Articles 131 and 136 of the Constitution have 
been used by the States frequently for bringing the matters related to 
State rivers before the Supreme Court via the Special Leave 
Petitions. Further, Article 143(1) of the Constitution has been used by 
the Central Government (via President) for seeking opinion of the 
rivers, under the 
-state water 
djudication of any dispute or 
complaint with respect to the use, distribution and control of waters of 
Parliament may also provide that neither the Supreme Court nor any 
pect of any such dispute or 
Water as a provincial subject but all power vested in the 
Viceroy. The Union Government retained the power to intervene or 
s relating to water 
between the provinces. The government from any province or ruler 
could complain to the GG who could form a commission and take a 
decision accordingly. The remedy to the decision of GG was with His 
The Act provides for the establishment of 
state river and 
hed by the Central government on 
o advise them.  
 
? The River Boards were supposed to prevent conflicts by preparing 
developmental schemes and working out the costs to each State. No water 
board, however, has so far been created under the River Boards Act, 
1956. National Commission for Review of
NCRWC, has observed that it is a fact that in relation to regulation and 
development of interstate waters, the River Boards Act, 1956 has 
remained a dead letter.
? Inter-State River Waters Dispute Act (1956):
Central government to set up an ad hoc tri
dispute between two or more states in relation to the waters of an inter
state river or river valley. The decision of the tribunal would be final and 
binding on the parties to the dispute. Neither the Supreme Court nor any 
other court is to have jurisdiction in respect of any water dispute which 
may be referred to such a tribunal under this Act. Main features of the 
act: 
1. It defines Water Disputes
2. Excludes such disputes from the jurisdiction of Supreme Court
3. Confers power on U
the same 
? Water Disputes- Disputes w.r.t. use, distribution and control of inter
rivers or valleys. State requests Union to refer dispute to tribunal. Only 
when Union govt is of the opinion that the same  
Scope of the IRWD Act: 
? IRWD Act is applicable only to interstate rivers / river valleys. If the 
action of one state affects the interests of one or more other states, then 
only water dispute is deemed to have arisen under IRWD Act. The action 
of the state can be of two types:
? Actions of a downstream state affecting the interest of an upstream state
? Actions of an upstream state affecting the interest of a downstream state
? Here we note that the action of the downstream state’s action can affect 
the upstream state only when the
barrage near the boundary or a submerging territory of the upstream state. 
 
The River Boards were supposed to prevent conflicts by preparing 
developmental schemes and working out the costs to each State. No water 
board, however, has so far been created under the River Boards Act, 
National Commission for Review of Working of the Constitution 
NCRWC, has observed that it is a fact that in relation to regulation and 
development of interstate waters, the River Boards Act, 1956 has 
remained a dead letter. 
State River Waters Dispute Act (1956):  This Act empowers the 
Central government to set up an ad hoc tribunal for the adjudication of a 
dispute between two or more states in relation to the waters of an inter
state river or river valley. The decision of the tribunal would be final and 
binding on the parties to the dispute. Neither the Supreme Court nor any 
ther court is to have jurisdiction in respect of any water dispute which 
may be referred to such a tribunal under this Act. Main features of the 
It defines Water Disputes 
Excludes such disputes from the jurisdiction of Supreme Court
Confers power on Union Govt. To constitute tribunals to resolve 
Disputes w.r.t. use, distribution and control of inter
rivers or valleys. State requests Union to refer dispute to tribunal. Only 
when Union govt is of the opinion that the same   
IRWD Act is applicable only to interstate rivers / river valleys. If the 
action of one state affects the interests of one or more other states, then 
only water dispute is deemed to have arisen under IRWD Act. The action 
of the state can be of two types: 
Actions of a downstream state affecting the interest of an upstream state
Actions of an upstream state affecting the interest of a downstream state
Here we note that the action of the downstream state’s action can affect 
the upstream state only when the downstream state is building a dam or 
barrage near the boundary or a submerging territory of the upstream state. 
The River Boards were supposed to prevent conflicts by preparing 
developmental schemes and working out the costs to each State. No water 
board, however, has so far been created under the River Boards Act, 
Working of the Constitution 
NCRWC, has observed that it is a fact that in relation to regulation and 
development of interstate waters, the River Boards Act, 1956 has 
This Act empowers the 
bunal for the adjudication of a 
dispute between two or more states in relation to the waters of an inter-
state river or river valley. The decision of the tribunal would be final and 
binding on the parties to the dispute. Neither the Supreme Court nor any 
ther court is to have jurisdiction in respect of any water dispute which 
may be referred to such a tribunal under this Act. Main features of the 
Excludes such disputes from the jurisdiction of Supreme Court 
nion Govt. To constitute tribunals to resolve 
Disputes w.r.t. use, distribution and control of inter-state 
rivers or valleys. State requests Union to refer dispute to tribunal. Only 
IRWD Act is applicable only to interstate rivers / river valleys. If the 
action of one state affects the interests of one or more other states, then 
only water dispute is deemed to have arisen under IRWD Act. The action 
Actions of a downstream state affecting the interest of an upstream state 
Actions of an upstream state affecting the interest of a downstream state 
Here we note that the action of the downstream state’s action can affect 
lding a dam or 
barrage near the boundary or a submerging territory of the upstream state. 
 
However, the actions of the upstream state can affect the downstream 
state in many ways, which includes:
? Consumption and storage of water by u
? Obstruction in flow of non
? Alternation in the quality of water due to anthropogenic activities by 
upstream state 
? These come under the purview of the legal causes of water dispute to the 
downstream states. 
Creation of Tribunal: 
? When the riparian states are not able to reach amicable agreements on 
their own in sharing of an interstate river waters, section 4 of IRWD Act 
provides dispute resolution process in the form of Tribunal. Upon 
realising that negotiations are impossible, it is
within a year of receipt of complaint.  
? The tribunal such created as a 
equivalent to Supreme Court verdict
IRWD Act. When the tribunal final verdict issue
deliberations on the draft verdict is accepted by central government and 
notified in the official gazette, the verdict becomes law and binding on 
the states for implementation. But at the same time, you must note that 
the verdict of the tribunal can be challenged in Supreme court via civil 
suits. 
? The IRWD act was amended in 2002 for the following purposes
? If there is any Tribunal award which predates 2002, it 
by new tribunals  
? If there is any tribunal award which post dates 2002, 
new tribunals. The idea is to resolve fresh water disputes which were not 
addressed by earlier tribunals/ agreements as and when they surface.
Major changes by the Amendment Act, 2002:
 
However, the actions of the upstream state can affect the downstream 
state in many ways, which includes: 
Consumption and storage of water by upstream state 
Obstruction in flow of non-flood water by upstream state 
Alternation in the quality of water due to anthropogenic activities by 
These come under the purview of the legal causes of water dispute to the 
n the riparian states are not able to reach amicable agreements on 
their own in sharing of an interstate river waters, section 4 of IRWD Act 
provides dispute resolution process in the form of Tribunal. Upon 
realising that negotiations are impossible, it is to constitute a tribunal 
within a year of receipt of complaint.   
The tribunal such created as a power of a Civil Court but its verdict is 
equivalent to Supreme Court verdict when pronounced in the ambit of 
IRWD Act. When the tribunal final verdict issued based on the 
deliberations on the draft verdict is accepted by central government and 
notified in the official gazette, the verdict becomes law and binding on 
the states for implementation. But at the same time, you must note that 
unal can be challenged in Supreme court via civil 
The IRWD act was amended in 2002 for the following purposes
If there is any Tribunal award which predates 2002, it cannot be altered 
If there is any tribunal award which post dates 2002, can be altered by 
The idea is to resolve fresh water disputes which were not 
addressed by earlier tribunals/ agreements as and when they surface.
Major changes by the Amendment Act, 2002: 
However, the actions of the upstream state can affect the downstream 
Alternation in the quality of water due to anthropogenic activities by 
These come under the purview of the legal causes of water dispute to the 
n the riparian states are not able to reach amicable agreements on 
their own in sharing of an interstate river waters, section 4 of IRWD Act 
provides dispute resolution process in the form of Tribunal. Upon 
to constitute a tribunal 
verdict is 
when pronounced in the ambit of 
d based on the 
deliberations on the draft verdict is accepted by central government and 
notified in the official gazette, the verdict becomes law and binding on 
the states for implementation. But at the same time, you must note that 
unal can be challenged in Supreme court via civil 
The IRWD act was amended in 2002 for the following purposes 
not be altered 
can be altered by 
The idea is to resolve fresh water disputes which were not 
addressed by earlier tribunals/ agreements as and when they surface. 
Page 5


 
Mechanisms of Inter
Inter-State Water Disputes:
India is facing a major water crisis as stated by numerous reports and 
organisations. According to the Central Water Commission, India’s per capita 
water availability in 1991 was 2,210 cubic metres per year, which dwindled to 
1,651 in 2011. A level as low as this
The projected figure for 2051 is pegged lower at 1,228 cubic metres.
According to the Composite Water Management Index (CWMI) report released 
by the Niti Aayog in 2018, 21 major cities (Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai, 
Hyderabad and others) are racing to reach zero groundwater levels by 2020, 
affecting access for 100 million
a new Jal Shakti (water) ministry, which aims at tackling water issues with a 
holistic and integrated perspective on the subject. The ministry has announced 
an ambitious plan to provide piped water connections to every household in 
India by 2024. 
However, 12 per cent of India’s population is already living the 'Day Zero' 
scenario, thanks to excessive groundwater pumping, an inefficient and wasteful 
water management system and years of deficient rains. The CWMI report also 
states that by 2030, the country's water demand is projected to be twice the 
available supply, implying severe water scarcity for hundreds of millions of 
people and an eventual six per cent loss in the country's GDP.
context that one needs to analyse the disputes regarding the inter
Water is a state subject via Entry 17 of State List, thus states are empowered to 
enact legislation on subject of water. But this entry is subject to the provisions 
of Entry 56 of Union List. The specific provisions in this regard are as under:
? Entry 56- Regulation and development of inter
valleys to the extent to which such regulation and development under 
the control of the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be
expedient in the public interest.
? Entry 17- Water that is to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, 
drainage and embankments, water storage and water power subject to 
the provisions of Entry 56 of List 
 
Mechanisms of Inter-state relations: 
Disputes:  
India is facing a major water crisis as stated by numerous reports and 
According to the Central Water Commission, India’s per capita 
water availability in 1991 was 2,210 cubic metres per year, which dwindled to 
1,651 in 2011. A level as low as this, is regarded as a ‘water-stressed’ condition. 
ected figure for 2051 is pegged lower at 1,228 cubic metres. 
According to the Composite Water Management Index (CWMI) report released 
by the Niti Aayog in 2018, 21 major cities (Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai, 
Hyderabad and others) are racing to reach zero groundwater levels by 2020, 
affecting access for 100 million people. The Union government recently formed 
a new Jal Shakti (water) ministry, which aims at tackling water issues with a 
holistic and integrated perspective on the subject. The ministry has announced 
an ambitious plan to provide piped water connections to every household in 
However, 12 per cent of India’s population is already living the 'Day Zero' 
scenario, thanks to excessive groundwater pumping, an inefficient and wasteful 
water management system and years of deficient rains. The CWMI report also 
030, the country's water demand is projected to be twice the 
available supply, implying severe water scarcity for hundreds of millions of 
people and an eventual six per cent loss in the country's GDP. It is under this 
context that one needs to analyse the disputes regarding the inter-state rivers. 
Water is a state subject via Entry 17 of State List, thus states are empowered to 
enact legislation on subject of water. But this entry is subject to the provisions 
. The specific provisions in this regard are as under:
Regulation and development of inter-State rivers and river 
valleys to the extent to which such regulation and development under 
the control of the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be
expedient in the public interest. 
Water that is to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, 
drainage and embankments, water storage and water power subject to 
the provisions of Entry 56 of List – I. 
India is facing a major water crisis as stated by numerous reports and 
According to the Central Water Commission, India’s per capita 
water availability in 1991 was 2,210 cubic metres per year, which dwindled to 
stressed’ condition. 
 
According to the Composite Water Management Index (CWMI) report released 
by the Niti Aayog in 2018, 21 major cities (Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai, 
Hyderabad and others) are racing to reach zero groundwater levels by 2020, 
ntly formed 
a new Jal Shakti (water) ministry, which aims at tackling water issues with a 
holistic and integrated perspective on the subject. The ministry has announced 
an ambitious plan to provide piped water connections to every household in 
However, 12 per cent of India’s population is already living the 'Day Zero' 
scenario, thanks to excessive groundwater pumping, an inefficient and wasteful 
water management system and years of deficient rains. The CWMI report also 
030, the country's water demand is projected to be twice the 
available supply, implying severe water scarcity for hundreds of millions of 
It is under this 
state rivers.  
Water is a state subject via Entry 17 of State List, thus states are empowered to 
enact legislation on subject of water. But this entry is subject to the provisions 
. The specific provisions in this regard are as under: 
State rivers and river 
valleys to the extent to which such regulation and development under 
the control of the Union is declared by Parliament by law to be 
Water that is to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, 
drainage and embankments, water storage and water power subject to 
 
? Seervai-Parliament controls matters of nati
control those of local interest keeping in mind the federal nature of the 
Indian state.  
? At the same time, the Articles 131 and 136 of the Constitution have 
been used by the States frequently for bringing the matters related to 
inter-State rivers before the Supreme Court via the Special Leave 
Petitions. Further, Article 143(1) of the Constitution has been used by 
the Central Government (via President) for seeking opinion of the 
Supreme Court on the matters related to inter
advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
Constitutional Mandate and History: 
Article 262 of the Constitution provides for the adjudication of inter
disputes. It makes two provisions:
? Parliament may by law provide for the a
complaint with respect to the use, distribution and control of waters of 
any inter-state river and river valley.
? Parliament may also provide that neither the Supreme Court nor any 
other court is to exercise jurisdiction in res
complaint. 
? GOI 1919- Water as a provincial subject but all power vested in the 
Viceroy. The Union Government retained the power to intervene or 
over-ride provincial authorities. 
? GOI 1935- Sections 130 and 131 dealt with dispute
between the provinces. The government from any province or ruler 
could complain to the GG who could form a commission and take a 
decision accordingly. The remedy to the decision of GG was with His 
Majesty in Council.
Parliamentary enactments:
? The River Boards Act (1956):
river boards for the regulation and development of inter
river valleys. A river board is establis
the request of the state governments concerned t
 
Parliament controls matters of national interest, while states 
control those of local interest keeping in mind the federal nature of the 
At the same time, the Articles 131 and 136 of the Constitution have 
been used by the States frequently for bringing the matters related to 
State rivers before the Supreme Court via the Special Leave 
Petitions. Further, Article 143(1) of the Constitution has been used by 
the Central Government (via President) for seeking opinion of the 
Supreme Court on the matters related to inter-State rivers, under the 
advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. 
Constitutional Mandate and History:  
Article 262 of the Constitution provides for the adjudication of inter-
disputes. It makes two provisions: 
Parliament may by law provide for the adjudication of any dispute or 
complaint with respect to the use, distribution and control of waters of 
state river and river valley. 
Parliament may also provide that neither the Supreme Court nor any 
other court is to exercise jurisdiction in respect of any such dispute or 
Water as a provincial subject but all power vested in the 
Viceroy. The Union Government retained the power to intervene or 
ride provincial authorities.  
Sections 130 and 131 dealt with disputes relating to water 
between the provinces. The government from any province or ruler 
could complain to the GG who could form a commission and take a 
decision accordingly. The remedy to the decision of GG was with His 
Majesty in Council. 
Parliamentary enactments: 
The River Boards Act (1956): The Act provides for the establishment of 
river boards for the regulation and development of inter-state river and 
river valleys. A river board is established by the Central government on 
the request of the state governments concerned to advise them. 
onal interest, while states 
control those of local interest keeping in mind the federal nature of the 
At the same time, the Articles 131 and 136 of the Constitution have 
been used by the States frequently for bringing the matters related to 
State rivers before the Supreme Court via the Special Leave 
Petitions. Further, Article 143(1) of the Constitution has been used by 
the Central Government (via President) for seeking opinion of the 
rivers, under the 
-state water 
djudication of any dispute or 
complaint with respect to the use, distribution and control of waters of 
Parliament may also provide that neither the Supreme Court nor any 
pect of any such dispute or 
Water as a provincial subject but all power vested in the 
Viceroy. The Union Government retained the power to intervene or 
s relating to water 
between the provinces. The government from any province or ruler 
could complain to the GG who could form a commission and take a 
decision accordingly. The remedy to the decision of GG was with His 
The Act provides for the establishment of 
state river and 
hed by the Central government on 
o advise them.  
 
? The River Boards were supposed to prevent conflicts by preparing 
developmental schemes and working out the costs to each State. No water 
board, however, has so far been created under the River Boards Act, 
1956. National Commission for Review of
NCRWC, has observed that it is a fact that in relation to regulation and 
development of interstate waters, the River Boards Act, 1956 has 
remained a dead letter.
? Inter-State River Waters Dispute Act (1956):
Central government to set up an ad hoc tri
dispute between two or more states in relation to the waters of an inter
state river or river valley. The decision of the tribunal would be final and 
binding on the parties to the dispute. Neither the Supreme Court nor any 
other court is to have jurisdiction in respect of any water dispute which 
may be referred to such a tribunal under this Act. Main features of the 
act: 
1. It defines Water Disputes
2. Excludes such disputes from the jurisdiction of Supreme Court
3. Confers power on U
the same 
? Water Disputes- Disputes w.r.t. use, distribution and control of inter
rivers or valleys. State requests Union to refer dispute to tribunal. Only 
when Union govt is of the opinion that the same  
Scope of the IRWD Act: 
? IRWD Act is applicable only to interstate rivers / river valleys. If the 
action of one state affects the interests of one or more other states, then 
only water dispute is deemed to have arisen under IRWD Act. The action 
of the state can be of two types:
? Actions of a downstream state affecting the interest of an upstream state
? Actions of an upstream state affecting the interest of a downstream state
? Here we note that the action of the downstream state’s action can affect 
the upstream state only when the
barrage near the boundary or a submerging territory of the upstream state. 
 
The River Boards were supposed to prevent conflicts by preparing 
developmental schemes and working out the costs to each State. No water 
board, however, has so far been created under the River Boards Act, 
National Commission for Review of Working of the Constitution 
NCRWC, has observed that it is a fact that in relation to regulation and 
development of interstate waters, the River Boards Act, 1956 has 
remained a dead letter. 
State River Waters Dispute Act (1956):  This Act empowers the 
Central government to set up an ad hoc tribunal for the adjudication of a 
dispute between two or more states in relation to the waters of an inter
state river or river valley. The decision of the tribunal would be final and 
binding on the parties to the dispute. Neither the Supreme Court nor any 
ther court is to have jurisdiction in respect of any water dispute which 
may be referred to such a tribunal under this Act. Main features of the 
It defines Water Disputes 
Excludes such disputes from the jurisdiction of Supreme Court
Confers power on Union Govt. To constitute tribunals to resolve 
Disputes w.r.t. use, distribution and control of inter
rivers or valleys. State requests Union to refer dispute to tribunal. Only 
when Union govt is of the opinion that the same   
IRWD Act is applicable only to interstate rivers / river valleys. If the 
action of one state affects the interests of one or more other states, then 
only water dispute is deemed to have arisen under IRWD Act. The action 
of the state can be of two types: 
Actions of a downstream state affecting the interest of an upstream state
Actions of an upstream state affecting the interest of a downstream state
Here we note that the action of the downstream state’s action can affect 
the upstream state only when the downstream state is building a dam or 
barrage near the boundary or a submerging territory of the upstream state. 
The River Boards were supposed to prevent conflicts by preparing 
developmental schemes and working out the costs to each State. No water 
board, however, has so far been created under the River Boards Act, 
Working of the Constitution 
NCRWC, has observed that it is a fact that in relation to regulation and 
development of interstate waters, the River Boards Act, 1956 has 
This Act empowers the 
bunal for the adjudication of a 
dispute between two or more states in relation to the waters of an inter-
state river or river valley. The decision of the tribunal would be final and 
binding on the parties to the dispute. Neither the Supreme Court nor any 
ther court is to have jurisdiction in respect of any water dispute which 
may be referred to such a tribunal under this Act. Main features of the 
Excludes such disputes from the jurisdiction of Supreme Court 
nion Govt. To constitute tribunals to resolve 
Disputes w.r.t. use, distribution and control of inter-state 
rivers or valleys. State requests Union to refer dispute to tribunal. Only 
IRWD Act is applicable only to interstate rivers / river valleys. If the 
action of one state affects the interests of one or more other states, then 
only water dispute is deemed to have arisen under IRWD Act. The action 
Actions of a downstream state affecting the interest of an upstream state 
Actions of an upstream state affecting the interest of a downstream state 
Here we note that the action of the downstream state’s action can affect 
lding a dam or 
barrage near the boundary or a submerging territory of the upstream state. 
 
However, the actions of the upstream state can affect the downstream 
state in many ways, which includes:
? Consumption and storage of water by u
? Obstruction in flow of non
? Alternation in the quality of water due to anthropogenic activities by 
upstream state 
? These come under the purview of the legal causes of water dispute to the 
downstream states. 
Creation of Tribunal: 
? When the riparian states are not able to reach amicable agreements on 
their own in sharing of an interstate river waters, section 4 of IRWD Act 
provides dispute resolution process in the form of Tribunal. Upon 
realising that negotiations are impossible, it is
within a year of receipt of complaint.  
? The tribunal such created as a 
equivalent to Supreme Court verdict
IRWD Act. When the tribunal final verdict issue
deliberations on the draft verdict is accepted by central government and 
notified in the official gazette, the verdict becomes law and binding on 
the states for implementation. But at the same time, you must note that 
the verdict of the tribunal can be challenged in Supreme court via civil 
suits. 
? The IRWD act was amended in 2002 for the following purposes
? If there is any Tribunal award which predates 2002, it 
by new tribunals  
? If there is any tribunal award which post dates 2002, 
new tribunals. The idea is to resolve fresh water disputes which were not 
addressed by earlier tribunals/ agreements as and when they surface.
Major changes by the Amendment Act, 2002:
 
However, the actions of the upstream state can affect the downstream 
state in many ways, which includes: 
Consumption and storage of water by upstream state 
Obstruction in flow of non-flood water by upstream state 
Alternation in the quality of water due to anthropogenic activities by 
These come under the purview of the legal causes of water dispute to the 
n the riparian states are not able to reach amicable agreements on 
their own in sharing of an interstate river waters, section 4 of IRWD Act 
provides dispute resolution process in the form of Tribunal. Upon 
realising that negotiations are impossible, it is to constitute a tribunal 
within a year of receipt of complaint.   
The tribunal such created as a power of a Civil Court but its verdict is 
equivalent to Supreme Court verdict when pronounced in the ambit of 
IRWD Act. When the tribunal final verdict issued based on the 
deliberations on the draft verdict is accepted by central government and 
notified in the official gazette, the verdict becomes law and binding on 
the states for implementation. But at the same time, you must note that 
unal can be challenged in Supreme court via civil 
The IRWD act was amended in 2002 for the following purposes
If there is any Tribunal award which predates 2002, it cannot be altered 
If there is any tribunal award which post dates 2002, can be altered by 
The idea is to resolve fresh water disputes which were not 
addressed by earlier tribunals/ agreements as and when they surface.
Major changes by the Amendment Act, 2002: 
However, the actions of the upstream state can affect the downstream 
Alternation in the quality of water due to anthropogenic activities by 
These come under the purview of the legal causes of water dispute to the 
n the riparian states are not able to reach amicable agreements on 
their own in sharing of an interstate river waters, section 4 of IRWD Act 
provides dispute resolution process in the form of Tribunal. Upon 
to constitute a tribunal 
verdict is 
when pronounced in the ambit of 
d based on the 
deliberations on the draft verdict is accepted by central government and 
notified in the official gazette, the verdict becomes law and binding on 
the states for implementation. But at the same time, you must note that 
unal can be challenged in Supreme court via civil 
The IRWD act was amended in 2002 for the following purposes 
not be altered 
can be altered by 
The idea is to resolve fresh water disputes which were not 
addressed by earlier tribunals/ agreements as and when they surface. 
 
? In 2002, an Amendment was made in the Ac
be constituted within a year of getting the request.
? It has also been mandated that the tribunal should give the award within 3 
years. In certain situations, two more years can be given. 
time period was 5 years within which the tribunal should give the award. 
Delays are a major concern with tribunals. This was pointed out by the 
Sarkaria Commission (1983) that claimed these inordinate delays to cause 
irrepairable loss to the s
? Tribunal award is not immediately implemented. Concerned parties may 
seek clarification within 3 months of the award.
? It has also been clarified that the Tribunal Awards will have the same 
force as the order or decree of Supr
beyond the jurisdiction of Supreme Court.
? So far, the awards of four Inter
1. Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal (April 1969)
2. Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal (April 1969)
3. Narmada Water Disputes Tribunal (October 1969)
4. Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (June 1990)
? Out of them, the first three tribunal awards were issued before the year 
2002 which cannot be altered by the new tribunals.
? The Cauvery water disputes tribunal o
February 2013. The Cauvery 
constituted by the Central government in June 2018 on the directions of 
the Supreme Court to address the dispute over sharing of river water 
among Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala and Puducherry.
? The Vamsadhara tribunal pronounced its final verdict in September 2017 
and permitted AP state to construct the side weir at Katragedda and 
Neradi barrage. In March 2018, Mahanadi Water Disputes Tribunal is
formed on the direction of Supreme Court to adjudicate water sharing 
dispute between Odisha and Chhattisgarh states headed by Justice A.M. 
 
In 2002, an Amendment was made in the Act by which the tribunal has to 
be constituted within a year of getting the request. 
It has also been mandated that the tribunal should give the award within 3 
years. In certain situations, two more years can be given. Thus maximum 
time period was 5 years within which the tribunal should give the award. 
Delays are a major concern with tribunals. This was pointed out by the 
Sarkaria Commission (1983) that claimed these inordinate delays to cause 
irrepairable loss to the states as well as the nation. 
Tribunal award is not immediately implemented. Concerned parties may 
seek clarification within 3 months of the award. 
It has also been clarified that the Tribunal Awards will have the same 
force as the order or decree of Supreme Court. The award is final and 
beyond the jurisdiction of Supreme Court. 
the awards of four Inter-State Water Tribunals have been notified:
Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal (April 1969) 
Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal (April 1969) 
a Water Disputes Tribunal (October 1969) 
Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (June 1990) 
Out of them, the first three tribunal awards were issued before the year 
2002 which cannot be altered by the new tribunals. 
Cauvery water disputes tribunal order was notified by the GoI on 20 
The Cauvery Water Management Authority was 
the Central government in June 2018 on the directions of 
to address the dispute over sharing of river water 
among Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala and Puducherry. 
The Vamsadhara tribunal pronounced its final verdict in September 2017 
and permitted AP state to construct the side weir at Katragedda and 
In March 2018, Mahanadi Water Disputes Tribunal is
formed on the direction of Supreme Court to adjudicate water sharing 
dispute between Odisha and Chhattisgarh states headed by Justice A.M. 
t by which the tribunal has to 
It has also been mandated that the tribunal should give the award within 3 
Thus maximum 
time period was 5 years within which the tribunal should give the award. 
Delays are a major concern with tribunals. This was pointed out by the 
Sarkaria Commission (1983) that claimed these inordinate delays to cause 
Tribunal award is not immediately implemented. Concerned parties may 
It has also been clarified that the Tribunal Awards will have the same 
eme Court. The award is final and 
er Tribunals have been notified: 
Out of them, the first three tribunal awards were issued before the year 
rder was notified by the GoI on 20 
was 
the Central government in June 2018 on the directions of 
to address the dispute over sharing of river water 
The Vamsadhara tribunal pronounced its final verdict in September 2017 
and permitted AP state to construct the side weir at Katragedda and 
In March 2018, Mahanadi Water Disputes Tribunal is 
formed on the direction of Supreme Court to adjudicate water sharing 
dispute between Odisha and Chhattisgarh states headed by Justice A.M.