Introduction to Inter-State Water Disputes
Inter-State water disputes are a continuing problem to federal water governance in India. They tend to become prolonged water disputes between states that share river basins because they are rooted in historical-geographical, constitutional, and institutional ambiguities. In India, the powers of the legislation dealing with water are divided between the Centre and the states to have maximum utilization while balancing the interests of the states.
There are provisions in the Constitution (Schedule 7 of the Constitution) that distribute the power between the use of water within a state and the purpose of regulating interstate waters. It gives authority to the Central government to exercise the laws and mechanisms for managing interstate rivers while the states retain autonomy regarding water utilization.
Water Disputes in India
There are 25 major river basins in India. Most rivers flowing across states’ river basins of India are shared resources, a coordinated approach between the states. This issue of inter-state water disputes in India is one of the most serious problems today in India. The recent examples of such disputes are the cases of the Cauvery Water Dispute and the Satluj Yamuna Link Canal.
Several Inter-State Water Disputes Tribunals have been established so far, but they are facing their own issues. There are conflicts over control of river water and the possession have continued since the formation of the Indian republic, with a long duration of time in resolution due to some factors such as political, historical, and institutional.
List of Interstate Water Dispute Tribunal
The list of inter-state water dispute tribunals is given below along with the concerned states and their current status.
Process of Interstate River Water Disputes Resolution
The resolution of water disputes is performed by the Interstate Water Dispute Act 1956. This Act states that if a State Government makes a request related to any water conflict and the Union Government is of opinion that the settlement of the water conflict is not resolved by mutual discussion, then a Water Disputes Tribunal is constituted for the settlement of the water dispute. This act was amended to include the major recommendations of the Sarkaria Commission in 2002. The amendments make it compulsory for a one-year time frame to set up the water disputes tribunal and also a 3-year time frame to give a decision.
Issues Related to Inter-State River Disputes Tribunals
Some of the issues related to inter-state river dispute tribunals are given below.
The main issue is the delayed and prolonged proceedings in dispute adjudication. For example, the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal, the Tribunal gave a decision in 2007 while it was constituted in 1990.
Under Article 136 (Special Leave Petition), the States or individuals can approach the Supreme Court, although the award given by the Tribunals is final and beyond the jurisdiction of the Courts.
The composition of the Tribunal consists of persons only from the judiciary means it is not multidisciplinary. Therefore it is similar to the Supreme Court Bench.
It is difficult to even set up a baseline for adjudication because of the lack of availability of authoritative water data.
There is too much discretion at too many stages of the process because of the complex policies of federal colonial legacy, and procedural complexities involving multiple stakeholders across governments and agencies of India.
The Inter-State River Water Disputes Amendment Bill, 2019 was introduced by the Centre to get the solution of the issues and to provide speed to the whole process of interstate water dispute resolution.
Did You Know?
There are a total of 3 tribunal awards given till now which are notified in the gazette by the Government of India. These disputes are related to Krishna (tribunal 1), Godavari, and Narmada rivers. These tribunal awards cannot be altered by the new tribunals as these were issued before the year 2002.
Conclusion
Rivers are the ultimate source of water. A sound solution must be found in order to deal with the water disputes in India. Tribunals are considering the aspects both between the Centre and states as well as amongst the states but mutual problems have often come in the process of political negotiations such as the case of states governed by parties opposed to the national ruling party. The Union Government should take necessary steps to resolve the issues related to the tribunals.
FAQs on Inter-State Water Dispute Tribunal
1. What is an Inter-State Water Dispute Tribunal?
An Inter-State Water Dispute Tribunal is a quasi-judicial body established by the Central Government of India. Its specific purpose is to adjudicate disputes that arise between two or more states regarding the use, distribution, or control of waters from any inter-state river or river valley. It acts as a specialised forum to resolve these conflicts outside the regular court system.
2. Which article of the Indian Constitution gives Parliament the power to legislate on inter-state water disputes?
Article 262 of the Indian Constitution deals with the adjudication of inter-state water disputes. It grants the Parliament two key powers:
- To provide by law for the adjudication of any dispute or complaint with respect to the use, distribution, or control of the waters of any inter-state river.
- To provide by law that neither the Supreme Court nor any other court shall exercise jurisdiction in respect of any such dispute.
3. What is the importance of the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956?
The Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956 is the primary law enacted by Parliament under Article 262. Its importance lies in providing the legal framework for setting up these tribunals. When a state government requests resolution for a water dispute that it has not been able to resolve through negotiations, the Central Government establishes a temporary tribunal under this Act to investigate the matter and give a final and binding decision.
4. Is the Inter-State Water Dispute Tribunal a constitutional or a statutory body?
An Inter-State Water Dispute Tribunal is a statutory body, not a constitutional one. While the power to create such a body is granted by the Constitution (Article 262), the tribunal itself is established under a specific law passed by the Parliament—the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956. A constitutional body, in contrast, is established directly by the provisions of the Constitution itself.
5. Why are the decisions of the Inter-State Water Dispute Tribunal not subject to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court?
Article 262(2) of the Constitution empowers Parliament to bar the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court over these disputes. The rationale is that water-sharing disputes are highly technical and complex, involving detailed analysis of hydrology, agriculture, and socio-economic needs. A specialised tribunal, often aided by technical assessors, is considered better equipped to handle these nuances than a general court of law. This is intended to ensure a more focused and faster adjudication, although delays can still occur.
6. What are the key features of the composition and award of a Water Dispute Tribunal?
Key features include:
- Composition: A tribunal is constituted by the Central Government and typically consists of a Chairman and two other members, nominated by the Chief Justice of India from among the sitting judges of the Supreme Court or a High Court.
- Award: The tribunal's final decision is called an 'award'. Once published by the Central Government in the Official Gazette, the award has the same force as an order or decree of the Supreme Court and is binding on all parties to the dispute.
7. Can you provide an example of a major Inter-State Water Dispute Tribunal constituted in India?
A prominent example is the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (CWDT), constituted in 1990. It was set up to resolve the long-standing dispute over the sharing of the Cauvery river water among the states of Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and the Union Territory of Puducherry. The tribunal gave its final award in 2007, which was later adjudicated upon by the Supreme Court, highlighting the complexities involved in implementing tribunal awards.
8. What are the main criticisms or challenges related to the functioning of these tribunals in India?
The main challenges and criticisms include:
- Protracted Delays: Despite timelines being set, tribunals often take many years, sometimes decades, to deliver their final awards.
- Implementation Defiance: State governments often challenge the awards or show reluctance in implementing them, leading to further legal and political battles.
- Lack of Robust Data: The absence of a comprehensive, agreed-upon database for river basins complicates the adjudication process and makes it prone to challenges.
- Politicisation of Disputes: Water sharing is a highly emotional issue, and political interference often hinders the effective and timely resolution of disputes.
