SECTION A
Essay
125 marks
Water disputes between States in federal India.
WRITE IN
90 min
1,000–1,200 words
Reading the topic
The topic asks about conflicts between states over shared rivers such as the Cauvery, Krishna and Mahadayi. The examiner expects analysis of the constitutional framework, why tribunals take decades, how politics and climate stress intensify disputes, and what reforms can turn rivers from sources of conflict into shared assets.
ThesisInter-state water disputes persist because water is treated as a state possession rather than a shared basin resource, so faster adjudication must be matched by basin-level cooperation and data transparency.
Dimensions to cover
- 1Constitution: water is a state subject under Entry 17 of the State List, subject to Union regulation of inter-state rivers under Entry 56 of the Union List, creating overlapping claims
- 2Adjudication: Article 262 and the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956 rely on tribunals that often take decades, keeping disputes alive
- 3Politics: water becomes an electoral emotion, so state governments resist compromise even after awards
- 4Climate and demand: erratic monsoons and rising urban and farm demand turn distress years into flashpoints
- 5Data and institutions: lack of shared, real-time hydrological data breeds mistrust between riparian states
- 6Cooperation: basin authorities and river-linking projects can share benefits, but need consensus and ecological caution
Counter-view
- Some argue disputes are natural in federalism and the courts have resolved them. The essay should accept judicial closure in some cases but show repeated non-compliance and delays as proof of institutional gaps
Open and close
- Open: Open with farmers in Mandya and Thanjavur, a few hundred kilometres apart, both watching the same Cauvery shrink in a bad monsoon and both blaming the other state
- Close: Conclude that rivers will unite states only when they are managed as basins with shared data and shared benefits
Where marks usually go
- Writing a case list of disputes without analysing why they persist
- Ignoring the constitutional scheme of Entry 17, Entry 56 and Article 262
- Proposing river linking as a cure-all without ecological caveats
Examples that fit
- CaseIn 2018 the Supreme Court gave its final verdict on the Cauvery dispute, modifying the tribunal award and declaring river water a national asset.Supreme Court of India, State of Karnataka v State of Tamil Nadu, 2018
- CaseThe Cauvery Water Management Authority was set up in 2018 to implement the award, an example of an implementing body after adjudication.Ministry of Jal Shakti notification, 2018
- CaseThe Mahadayi Water Disputes Tribunal gave its award in 2018 among Goa, Karnataka and Maharashtra, yet disputes over diversion continued.Mahadayi Water Disputes Tribunal report, 2018
- CurrentThe Ken-Betwa river link, whose foundation stone was laid in December 2024, shows interlinking as cooperation but also raises concerns about the Panna Tiger Reserve.Ministry of Jal Shakti press release, December 2024
- HistoryThe Mullaperiyar dam dispute between Kerala and Tamil Nadu shows how colonial-era agreements and safety fears keep conflicts alive.Supreme Court of India, Mullaperiyar judgments, 2006 and 2014