Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
Water, the lifeblood of civilization, is increasingly becoming a source of contention, particularly in a federal structure like India. Interstate water disputes, rooted in competing demands for a scarce resource, pose a significant challenge to the nation’s unity and development. The issue gained prominence post-independence with the reorganization of states along linguistic lines, leading to altered river basin boundaries. Recent disputes, such as those concerning the Cauvery and Yamuna rivers, highlight the urgency of a comprehensive and effective resolution mechanism. This essay will delve into the complexities of interstate water disputes in India, examining their causes, the existing framework, and potential solutions.
Historical Context and Constitutional Provisions
The roots of interstate water disputes can be traced back to the colonial era, but they intensified after independence. The reorganization of states in 1956, based on linguistic principles, disrupted natural river basins, creating jurisdictional conflicts. The Indian Constitution, while recognizing the importance of water, doesn’t explicitly define ‘water’ as a subject. However, Entry 17 of List I (Union List) grants the Union Parliament the power to legislate on regulation and development of inter-state rivers and river valleys. Entry 6 of List II (State List) gives states the power to legislate on water within their territory. This dualism often leads to conflicts.
Existing Legal and Institutional Framework
Several laws and institutions have been established to address interstate water disputes:
- Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956: This Act provides a mechanism for resolving disputes through Tribunals. However, it lacks a clear timeline for resolution and doesn’t have binding powers.
- River Boards Act, 1956: Envisions the establishment of River Boards for inter-state planning and regulation, but only two boards have been constituted – the Bhakra Beas Management Board and the Yamuna Valley Development Authority.
- National Water Policy (2012): Advocates for a national perspective on water resource development, emphasizing participatory irrigation management and water conservation.
- Tribunals: Various tribunals have been constituted for specific disputes, including the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal (CWDT), the Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal (KWDT), and the Ravi and Beas Water Tribunal (RBWT).
Causes of Interstate Water Disputes
The causes of these disputes are multifaceted:
- Geographical Factors: Many rivers originate in one state and flow through others, creating upstream-downstream dependencies.
- Economic Factors: Water is crucial for agriculture, industry, and power generation, leading to competition for resources.
- Political Factors: State governments often politicize water issues to gain electoral advantage.
- Lack of Comprehensive Data: Absence of reliable data on water availability and demand exacerbates disputes.
- Climate Change: Increasing climate variability and extreme weather events are intensifying water stress.
Case Studies
The Cauvery Water Dispute
The dispute between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu over the Cauvery river is a classic example. The CWDT’s award in 2007, while attempting to allocate water, failed to fully satisfy either state. The dispute continues to simmer, with both states frequently approaching the Supreme Court. The issue highlights the limitations of the existing legal framework and the need for a more equitable and sustainable solution.
The Yamuna Water Dispute
The dispute between Haryana, Delhi, and Uttar Pradesh over the Yamuna river is another protracted conflict. Delhi’s water needs are largely met by the Yamuna, but upstream withdrawals by Haryana and Uttar Pradesh leave Delhi with insufficient water, particularly during the summer months. This dispute underscores the challenges of managing water resources in densely populated regions.
Shortcomings of the Existing Framework
| Issue | Shortcoming |
|---|---|
| Tribunal Awards | Lack of enforceability and often delayed implementation. |
| River Boards | Limited scope and lack of adequate powers. |
| Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956 | No fixed timeline for dispute resolution, leading to prolonged litigation. |
| Data Availability | Lack of reliable and comprehensive data on water resources. |
Potential Solutions
- Strengthening the Institutional Framework: Establishing a permanent, independent National Water Disputes Authority with binding powers.
- Promoting Cooperative Federalism: Encouraging states to adopt a collaborative approach to water management through inter-state councils and agreements.
- Investing in Water Conservation: Promoting water-efficient irrigation techniques, rainwater harvesting, and groundwater recharge.
- Improving Data Management: Establishing a national water information system with real-time data on water availability and demand.
- Integrated River Basin Management: Adopting a holistic approach to river basin management, considering ecological and socio-economic factors.
Conclusion
Interstate water disputes represent a complex challenge to India’s federal polity and sustainable development. While the existing legal and institutional framework provides a basis for resolution, its shortcomings necessitate a comprehensive overhaul. Strengthening the dispute resolution mechanism, fostering cooperative federalism, and prioritizing water conservation are crucial steps towards ensuring equitable and sustainable water management. A long-term solution requires a paradigm shift from adversarial approaches to collaborative governance, recognizing water as a shared resource vital for the nation’s future.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.