Introduction

India is a federal democratic country and the flowing of river crosses the state boundaries,
constructing efficient and equitable mechanisms for allocating river flows is an important legal
and constitutional issue.
•
So many river water disputes have erupted since independence. India is mainly depends on
agriculture (Irrigation) and proper maintaining of irrigation depends on the availability of river
water.
•
There are Multi purpose projects and irrigation projects constructed across the rivers for the
efficient supply of water for the agricultural purposes.
•
So, the sharing of river water resources plays an important role for the welfare of the people.
What are interstate water disputes ?
•
Disputes arising among the states for sharing the water resources
(Rivers) are called interstate water disputes. This type of disputes is
high in India in sharing the river water between the upstream states
and downstream states.

Constitutional Provisions and powers of state and central

And the parliament has powers to make laws about the subject matters present in the
union list
.

The central government has powers to make laws about the subject matters present in the
concurrent list.
•
By Entry 17 Water is in State List
:
Water, irrigation and canal, water development and Storage are a state subject.
•
By Entry 56 Water is in Union List
:
Regulation and development of water under the control of the union is declared by parliament
bylaw to be expedient in the public interest.
•
Article 262
explicitly grants parliament the right to legislate over the matter in Entry 56 and also gives
primacy over the Supreme court.
Two legislations which are relevant to: the interstate water disputes Act 1956
and the River Boards Act 1956.
•
Both of these acts are introduced along with the statesreorganization act of 1956.
•
The two acts are in response to the corresponding provisionsin the constitution.
•
The Interstate Water Disputes Act 1956 (ISWDA) was inresponse to the article 262,
which stipulates that theparliament should make necessary laws to adjudicate
disputesbetween states over interstate waters.
Procedure for the formation oftribunal :
The following is the procedure for the water disputes arose among
the two or more states -
•
the central government receives a request from the stategovernments under section 3
of the Interstate River Water DisputesAct (ISRWD) with regard to the existence of
water dispute.
•
According to this act, first it will try to settle the problem withnegotiations with the
states and later the central government referto a tribunal which consists of former
supreme court judges andthey gives the final award to the central government after
properstudying of dispute.
KAVERI RIVER
•
The sharing of waters of the Kaveri River has been the source of a serious conflict between
the two states of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka.
•
The genesis of this conflict rests in two agreements in 1892and 1924 between the erstwhile
Madras Presidency and Kingdom of Mysore. •The 802 kilometres Kaveri river has 44,000km
basin area in Tamil Nadu and 32,000km basin area in Karnataka.
The inflow from Karnataka is 425 TMC ft whereas that from Tamil Nadu is 252 TMC ft.

Based on inflow Karnataka is demanding its due share of water from the river.
•
It states that the pre-independence agreements are invalid and are skewed heavily in the favour
of the Madras Presidency, and has demanded a renegotiated settlement based on "equitable
sharing of the waters".
•
Tamil Nadu, on the other hand, pleads that it has already developed almost 3,000,000 acres
(12,000 sq. km) ) of land and as a result has come to depend very heavily on the existing pattern
of usage.
•
Any change in this pattern, it says, will adversely affect the livelihood of millions of farmers in
the state.

.
Decades of negotiations between the parties bore no fruit. TheGovernment of India then
constituted a tribunal in 1990 to lookinto the matter.
•
After hearing arguments of all the parties involved for the next 16years, the tribunal delivered
its final verdict on 5 February 2007.
In its verdict, the tribunal allocated 419TMCof water annually toTamil Nadu and 270 TMC to
Karnataka; 30 TMC of Cauvery riverwater toKeralaand 7 TMC toPuducherry.•
Karnataka and Tamil Nadu being the major shareholders,Karnataka was ordered to release 192
TMC of water to Tamil Naduin a normal year from June to May.
Indian Government notifiesCauvery Water Dispute Tribunal
•
On 20 February 2013, based on the directions of the SupremeCourt, the Indian Government
notified the final award of theCauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (CWDT) on sharing the waters
ofthe Kaverisystem among the basin States of Karnataka, Tamil Nadu,and Kerala and Union
territory of Puducherry.
•
The "extraordinary" notification in the gazette dated 19 February2013 says the order takes
effect on the date of publication.
•
The Tribunal, in a unanimous decision in 2007, determined the totalKaveribasin water
availability in a normal year as 740 TMC at theLower ColeroonAnicutsite andGrand Anaicut,
including 14 TMCfor minimum environmental flows and unavoidable wastage to thesea.
•
The final award makes an annual allocation of 419 TMC to TamilNadu in the entire Cauvery
Utilisable water in Tamil Nadu is sum of beneficial water uses and the water going
waste to sea in excess of 14 TMC at Lower Coleroon and Grand Anaicuts.
•
The water sharing criteria is based on two situations:

When water availability is above the normal water year flows.

When water availability is equal or below the normal water year flows
•
The 50% dependable water year is considered as normal water year whose total water
availability in the basin is 740 TMC
•
All the unused water in the reservoirs (≥ 3 TMC storage) at the
beginning of water year in the basin are also considered for arriving the total available
water in a water year to be shared by the riparian states.
Tamil Nadu has to use 10 TMC for minimum environmental flows
downstream of Lower Coleroon Anicutand supply 7 TMC to Puducherry
out of the 192 TMC water released by Karnataka in a normal water year.
•
Kerala can use 21 TMC fromKabiniriverbasin, 6 TMC from Bhavani river
basin and 3 TMC fromPambar river basin in a normal year. Water going
waste to sea at Lower Coleroon Anicutin excess of 4TMC (other than 10
TMC minimum environmental flows) in any water year forms part of
utilisable water share of Tamil Nadu.
•
The ambiguity in the verdict is that utilisable water (clauses IV andV) in
the basin is allocated among the states but it has not defined how to
measure the same.
•
Instead clause XIV of final order defines how to measure the beneficial
water uses which is not equal to the utilisable water
2018
•
Supreme Court (SC) on 9 January 2018 declared that it would pronounce its verdict
clearing all the pending cases and the confusion within a month.
•
On 16 February 2018, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has pronounced its verdict.
•
Reduced 14 tmc water allocation to Tamil nadu and now Karnataka to release only 177
tmc of water to Tamil nadu for next 15 years.
•
The verdict also mandated to formally constitute the Kavery river management board
by the union government within 40days for implementing strictly the tribunal award
and its verdict