WATER LAW FRAMEWORK IN INDIA - INTER STATE WATER

DISPUTE

Environmental Law

Submitted By:

Shivendra Singh Baghel

SM0113046

IIIrd Year, VIth Semester

National Law University, Assam

 Content

Table of Cases ...ii

Table of Statutes.ii
Table of Abbreviations.......................................iii

Introduction7-8
Aim.4
Objectives...4
Scope and Limitations............4
Review of Literature.......6
Research Questions.....5
Research Methodology...5
Need for a National Water Framework Law in India.9-10
National Water Policy 200211
National Water Framework Act..12
Constitutional Mechanisms and its Implementations............13-14
Deficiencies in the existing legal framework .....................15-16
Conclusion...17
Bibliography18

i
Table of Statutes
1. 1956 - The River Boards Act
2. 1956 - The Inter-State Water Disputes Act
3. 1987 - National Water Policy
4. 2000 - Water Framework Directive
5. 2002 - National Water Policy
6. 2012 National Water Policy

ii
Table of Abbreviation

1. Art. Article

2. ed. Edition

3. etc. Etcetra

4. HC High Court

5. Honble Honourable

6. J. Justice

7. NWP National Water policy

8. NWRC National Water Resources Council

9. SC Supreme Court

10. Sec. Section

iii
 Abstract

The objective of this paper is to study the Indian water disputes and their settlement
mechanisms in view of the environmental law as the laws governing the inter-state water
disputes are ambiguous and opaque in nature. India is a country of lakes and rivers which is
stretches across several states at the length therefore constructing efficient and equitable
mechanisms for allocating river flows keeping in view the environment upkeep and
conservation has long been an important legal and constitutional issue. The issue of the water
is primarily a state subject while the other actors which play an important role in
institutionalising and regulating the laws are the national parliament, the courts and also ad
hoc tribunals. It is a growing consensus that the existing institutions are increasingly failing
to generate outcomes to generate growth and environmental welfare therefore research seeks
to determine some more effective and efficient ways which can contribute to conservation and
resolution of such matters.

Aim

The main purpose of this research is to study the Water Law Framework in India Inter State
Water Dispute.

Objective

The main purpose of this research is to study and analyze the Water Law Framework in India
in regard to The Inter State Water Disputes Act, 1956 and to study its relevant provisions to
provide adjudication in the interstate water dispute matters. To analyze the various Tribunals
formed to adjudicate on the various interstate river dispute matters and to relate it with the
Environmental Protection Act, 1986.

Scope and Limitations

1. To understand the standing laws on the water framework in India.

2. To understand the relevant Environmental Laws to redress the interstate water dispute
matters in the country.

4
Research Questions

1. What are the important cases with regard to interstate water disputes in the country and
what were the decisions of the competent authority over it?
2. What are the different laws and statutes passed by the parliament to address the issue
of water disputes in India?
3. What are the various bodies created to promote the river-water development structure
in India?

Research Methodology

For the completion of the project the doctrinal method is been used where it will be concerned
with the documental research irrespective of the consideration of views and perspectives of
society and people as done in the non-doctrinal research method.

The author has used both the primary and the secondary sources of data collection, where the
documents have gone through some interpretation and it has been used further for the study of
the research problem.

Mode of citation: OSCOLA

5
Review of Literature

The books and articles reviewed for the accomplishment of research for this paper are:

a) Water Policies and legal Framework in India, Mohd. Shawahiq Siddiqui, Osmania
University, Hyderabad.

The paper tries to look at the legal frameworks in the water sector in India, from the first laws
drafted during British India to the revisions and additions post-independence. It talks about the
provisions in the law as well as the flaws and omissions and suggests an examination of and
strengthening of the existing water laws and policies to address the problems of environment,
ecology, equity and development.

b) Water Management Law and Policy in India, Mohit Singhvi, M. S. Ramaiah College
of Law, Bangalore.

The author has compiled the various judgments given by judiciary primarily in cases of inter-
state water disputes and has elaborately described about the precedents set after it. The basic
gist of the water framework law arises from the acts and statutes formed in this regard which
has been briefly described by the author in this research article.

c) Inter State Water Disputes in India: Institutions and Policies, Alan Richards & Nirvikar
Singh, Department of Environmental Studies & Department of Economics, University
of California, Santa Cruz.

This is a very descriptive and elaborative research on the water law framework in India which
describes about the Indian water-dispute settlement mechanisms and talks about the political
impacts of the judicial decisions on the economy, society and ecology of the state. This research
was helpful to make certain points for the effective arbitration in the regard of the inter-state
water disputes and efficient design of mechanisms for negotiating inter-state water disputes.

6
Introduction

The basic human rights known to any civilized society are the right to food, water, decent
environment, education, medical care and shelter. Hence, Air and water, the most precious gifts
of the nature, are very essential not only to the mankind but flora and fauna also. All living
creatures on the mother earth have a right to environment in order to survive them. According
to section 2 (a) of the Environmental Protection Act, 1986 'Environment' includes (i) water, air
and land (ii) the inter relationship which exists among and between, (a) water, air and land, and
(b) human beings, other living creatures, plants, microorganisms and property. The Framework
is meant to provide the larger structure for organizing the support mechanisms to States and
communities in their governing institutions at the levels that matter, the Local Government,
CBOs (Community Based Institutions), the Management of ponds, water bodies, watersheds,
aquifers, and river basins. The Framework also includes in it the relevant aspects of the role of
the national government in the complex area of dispute resolution. In a federal setup this has
to be a national task.

Existing water law is made up of a number of different instruments. This is the case at the
international level where only certain aspects of water law have been developed and where no
international water law treaty exists. This is also the case within India where it remains difficult
to identify a coherent body of comprehensive law concerning water. This is related to the fact
that distinct concerns have been addressed in different enactments. This is also due to the
division of power between the centre and the states and the fact that water regulation is mostly
in the hands of the states.

In India, there are many inter-state rivers. The regulation and development of the waters of
these rivers and river valleys continues to be a source of inter-state friction regarding the control
and distribution of it claimed by the various states at the same time. Several legislations as well
as Articles 262, 263 and 131 provide for the mechanism for settlement of interstate water
disputes since the post-independence era. Over the years, several inter-State river water
disputes have come up before the Supreme Court with reference to a variety of issues such as
the competence of the Tribunal to deal with a request for an interim allocation (Cauvery); the
non-implementation of an Order of the Tribunal (Cauvery); failures on the environmental and
rehabilitation fronts (Narmada); the constitutionality of an Act of a State Legislature
terminating all past water accords (Punjab)1; etc. In each of these cases, what went before the

1
Sainath P., Little Pani, Less Panchayat(2002),The Hindu,15 and 22 September.

7
Supreme Court was not the water-sharing issue, which had been adjudicated or was under
adjudication by a Tribunal, but some other related legal or constitutional issue.2 Analyzing the
decision of the Supreme Court in inter-state water disputes, it can been seen that Supreme Court
point to a constitutive tension between we the people and sovereign socialist secular
democratic republic of India.3 It is important to understand and reflect on the tension before
quick and ready prescriptions are given out to inter-state water conflicts. Inter-state disputes
over water are of two types. One type of dispute relates to the rights of states and scope of their
rights within the Union. With the exception of reopening the terms of unification, the states
may apply to the Supreme Court to resolve questions of rights flowing from the constitution.4
Inter-state rivers; on the other hand do not involve questions of rights flowing from the
constitution itself.

Important legislations include The River Boards Act, 1956 and The Inter-State Water Disputes
Act, 1956 have been crucial for detailing the adjudication of disputes, advisory opinions,
negotiations and so on. For example, the waters of Krishna, Godavari, Narmada, Yamuna,
Cauvery and others. There have been various bodies created to promote the river-water
development, namely the National Water Development Agency and the Resources
Development Council with the Prime Minister as its chairman.

2
The Supreme court and river water disputes, Ramaswamy R. Iyer, The Hindu , 17/09/12
3
Petrella, R. The Water Manifesto. London: Zed Books, and Bangalore: Books for change
4
The Constitution Of India, Article 131

8
Need for a National Water Framework Law in India

It was the recognition of the need for a minimal national consensus on certain basic perceptions,
concepts and principles that led to the adoption of the National Water Policy of 1987 and the
NWP of 2002. Currently the process of considering further revisions to the National Water
Policy is in progress. However, a national water policy has no legal status. The law is intended
to be justiciable in the sense that the laws passed and the executive actions taken by the Central
and State Governments and the devolved functions exercised by PRIs will have to conform to
the general principles and priorities laid down in the framework law, and is not intended to
centralise water management or to change the Centre-State relations in any way. No
administrative machinery or institutional structure (except for a national water Information
system) is envisaged at the Centre under this framework law, and consequently no penal
provisions are envisaged. This is not intended to exclude the necessary administrative
machinery, institutional structure and penal provisions in State laws within this framework and
that deviations can be challenged in a court of law.

National Water Policy (2012) noted that the present scenario of water resources and their
management in India had given rise to several concerns, important amongst them were;

1. Rapid growth in demand for water due to population growth, urbanization and changing
lifestyle Issues related to water governance have not been addressed adequately.
Mismanagement of water resources has led to a critical situation in many parts of the
country.
2. The inter-use and inter-State conflicts that leads to conflicts, and the need for a national
consensus on water-sharing principles, and on the arrangements for minimising
conflicts and settling them quickly without resort to adjudication to the extent possible.
3. The emerging concerns about the impact of climate change on water and the need for
appropriate responses at local, national, regional, and global levels.

The legislative framework of the Constitution related to water is based on Entry 17 of the State
List, Entry 56 in the Union List and Article 252 of the Constitution. These are:

1. Entry 17 in List II (State List) in Schedule VII 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.

9
 2. Entry 56 of List I (Union List): 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 is primarily a State subject. The States have the competence to make laws, formulate
and implement plans and schemes for development of water resources for water supply,
irrigation, hydropower etc. Several States have enacted different laws also. But, most of these
laws do not address the present concerns in the water resources sector and in a holistic manner.
Considering its critical importance in national development, water needs to be managed with a
national perspective based on the acceptance of a few common fundamental principles. This
need was recognized many years ago. The National Development Council in its 36th meeting
held on March 14, 1982 had observed that a climate should be created in which national water
plans are prepared keeping in view the national perspective as well as State and regional needs.
In that context the Council welcomed the proposal for setting up of the National Water
Resources Council with Prime Minister as Chairman and Chief Ministers of all States and the
concerned Central Ministers as members. Accordingly, Government of India, by resolution
dated 10th March, 1983 set up National Water Resources Council (NWRC) with the Prime
Minister as its Chairman, with several Union Ministers and the Chief Ministers/Administrators
of all States and Union Territories as members. Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources is the
Secretary of NWRC. It is this recognition of the need for a minimal national consensus on
certain basic perceptions, concepts and principles that led to the adoption of the National Water
Policy (NWP) of 1987, 2002 and 2012. However, a national water policy has no legal status.

The Twelfth Five Year Plan Document, approved by the National Development Council at its
57th meeting held on 27th December, 2012, also highlights that different State Governments
tend to adopt different positions on the rights of different States over the waters of a river basin
that straddles more than one State. Such legal divergences tend to render the resolution of inter-
State river-water conflicts even more difficult than they already are. Many countries in the
world have national water laws or codes, and some of them are widely regarded as very
enlightened. There is also the well-known European Water Framework Directive of 2000.
Therefore, both National Development Council and National Water Resources Council have
emphasized the need of having a National Water Framework Law.

10
National Water Policy 2002

National Water Policy 2002 has graduated from the National Policy on Water 1987. The main
change was the incorporation of the integrated water resource management (IWRM). River
basin management was emphasized. The Policy has been reviewed and updated in response to
the number of new issues that have emerged over a period of time since its formulation in 1987.
NPW 2002 envisages that water is the part of larger ecosystem, realizing the importance and
the scarcity attached to fresh water it has to be treated as an essential component for the
sustenance of life. The policy recognizes that water is a scarce and precious natural resource
and needs to be planned. Thus, it emphasizes developing management strategies for the
conservation of water keeping in view the socio-economic aspects and the needs of the states.
Ecology is given a rather low priority (4th) but has been indirectly given recognition for its
importance for the management of fresh water. The policy states that the management of the
quality of the environment and management of the ecological balance should be the primary
consideration.5 The policy envisages the integrated and multi-disciplinary approach to
planning, formulation, clearance and implementation of projects including the rehabilitation of
people and the command area development. The policy says that the detrimental environmental
impacts of the access use of ground water extraction must be taken care of by the centre and
the state government.6 The policy talks about the coordination process for the implementation
of the national water policy. Considering the large scale use of water in agriculture and the fact
that water rights in India are loosely linked with land rights, policy also talks about the
integration of the water use and land use policies.7 The central and the state governments are
equally responsible for preventing the detrimental overexploitation of water. The Policy takes
into account the industries discharging the waste in to the water streams, rivers and other water
bodies and says that effluents should be treated to acceptable levels of pollutants before
discharging in to the main streams and that the minimum flow should be ensured to maintain
the ecology keeping in view the social considerations.8 The policy envisages that all the
possible efforts should be made for developing projects to ensure water availability for tribal
people and socially disadvantaged sections of the society. The policy is also vocal on the issue
of seeking scientific and technical assistance for the water sector development and planning
through public private partnership on need basis.

5
National waterPolicy2002,para 6.5
6
National Water Policy 2002 ,Para 7.3
7
National Water Policy 2002 ,Para 9.2
8
National Water Policy 2002 ,Para 14

11
National Water Framework Act

Several States are enacting laws on water and related issues. These can be quite divergent in
their perceptions of water. Again, under a number of Projects and Programmes different States
are undertaking water sector reforms, and as a part of this they have formulated or are
formulating State Water Policies. Here again, significant divergences are possible. Some
divergences of policy and law may be inevitable and acceptable, but they have to be within
reasonable limits set by a broad national consensus on certain basics. Different State
Governments tend to adopt different positions on the rights of different States over the waters
of a river basin that straddles more than one State. Such legal divergences tend to render the
resolution of inter-State river-water conflicts even more difficult than they already are. A
national statement of the general legal position and principles that should govern such cases
seems desirable.

The proposed national water law is not intended to centralise water management or to change
the Centre-State relations in any way. What is proposed is not a Central water management law
or a command-and-control law of the usual kind, but a framework law, i.e., an umbrella
statement of general principles governing the exercise of legislative and/or executive (or
devolved) powers by the Centre, the States and the local governance institutions.

No administrative machinery or institutional structure (except for a national water Information

system) is envisaged at the Centre under this framework law, and consequently no penal
provisions are envisaged. This is not intended to exclude the necessary administrative
machinery, institutional structure and penal provisions in State laws within this framework.

However, the law is intended to be justiciable in the sense that the laws passed and the executive
actions taken by the Central and State Governments and the devolved functions exercised by
PRIs will have to conform to the general principles and priorities laid down in the framework
law, and that deviations can be challenged in a court of law.

12
Constitutional Mechanisms and its Implementations

Certain laws and statutes have been passed by the parliament to address the issue of water
disputes. The regulation of inter-state river was one such item which led to enactment of the
River boards Act 1956, and other such as the Narmada Control Authority, that are only
involved at operational level.9 Union has other water-related powers that it can exercise, for
instances, in the context of the impact assessment of large projects that require an
environmental clearance.10 In order to better understand the constitutional mechanism of inter-
state water dispute, two important legislation passed by parliament needs to be analyzed, that
are The River Boards Act, 1956 and The Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956.

Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956

The genesis of the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956 lies in the Government of India
Act, 1935. It contains provision similar to Sections 130 to 132 of the Act of 1935.This act had
been passed in pursuance of Article 262 of the Constitution. When distributing subjects
according to whether they should be dealt with by the states, the union or concurrently by both,
water was placed on the state list.11

The Act gives the meaning of water disputes and provides for complains regarding water
disputes from various states to Central government. It also provides for the adjudication of
disputes relating to waters of Inter-State Rivers and River Valleys. The Act enables setting up
of tribunals to settle disputes on Inter-State water or river when the Central government is of
the view that the matter cannot be solved by negotiations. It had been recommended by The
Sarkaria Commission to set up a Tribunal within one year of complaint by the State
Government and to declare its decision within five years. According to the Act, decisions given
by the tribunals so constituted will be final and binding and no appeal can lie in Supreme Court.
Thus the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and other courts is clearly barred in such matters.
Furthermore, tribunals responsibility is not limited only to adjudicate the matters but also
investigation of matters which are of public importance like water pollution, flood control,
sustainability of river basin productivity, climate change effects and others. Under the Act,
though Union government had set up many water tribunals like the Krishna Tribunal, the

9
Mohiel AD, Government Policies and Programmes in J Briscoe & RPS Malik, Handbook of Water Resources
in India- Development, Management and Strategies (New Delhi: The World Bank and Oxford University Press,
2007) 10
10
Government of India, the Environmental Impact Assessment Notification 2006.
11
Pani N, the Place of the Tribunal in Inter-State Water Dispute, Vol. 2 Issue 1.

13
Narmada Tribunal, The Godavari Tribunal, the Cauvery Tribunal, The Ravi, Beas Tribunal etc.
Though the act had given quite clear guidelines for any water dispute but even then different
disputes had followed different paths to settlement as law permits considerable discretion.

River Boards Act 1956

In pursuance of the power provided under Entry 56 of List I, the Parliament passed the River
Boards Act in the year 1956. The board was mainly having two functions, first, to ensure proper
and optimum utilization of the water resources of the inter-state rivers and secondly to monitor
different schemes of irrigation, water supply, hydroelectricity power generation. However the
nature of work of the board is advisory in nature and is meant only for the purpose to give
advice and suggestions. Therefore the Act has been rendered as a dead letter by not appointing
River Boards.12

National Water Policy, 1987

The board is formulated under the Ministry of Water Resource to regulate the development and
planning of water and to ensure their optimum utilization. Specifically, Section 21 of this water
policy deals with distribution of water amongst the states. It has stressed the need for
development and management of water resources in a holistic and integrated manner covering
different needs through participatory approach. Other function of the board includes to ensure
proper allocation of water resource, prevent any form of exploitation, and establish a
standardized national information system with a network of data banks and data bases and other
such related functions.

This national water policy of 1987 was amended in 2012, now the board emphasis on
development of water bodies by giving them the status of economic good.

The centre has created two more bodies to promote river-water development. The National
Water Development Agency is a non-statutory body with all State irrigation ministers as its
members. The functions of the agency is to carry out surveys, investigations and studies for the
peninsular rivers development, component of the national water plan. The agency is to promote
optimum utilization of countrys resources. This envisages the use of surplus water of all rivers
in the country. The other body is the water Resources Development Council with the Prime
Minister as its Chairman and all state Chief Ministers as members.

12
Supra note 2, pg 9113

14
Deficiencies in the existing legal framework

Absence of the Uniform Water Law

Constitutionally water is a state subject.13 In the absence of uniform law and policy, water
management in India remains by and large uncoordinated. Various states have varied legal
positions on water ownership. It is felt that water being a common natural heritage has to be
governed by different set of laws which are essentially not jus civile.14 Water is a natural
heritage to be protected and not a commercial property for absolute private use and exploitation
it has to be governed by different set of laws which meet the requirement of the contemporary
society. The Supreme Court of India in various judgments on water related issues has laid
emphasis on the principle of jus gentium15 or doctrine of public trust inherent in the Article 21
of the Constitution of India.16 This important doctrine of Public Trust can be appropriately
utilized for attaining good ecological status for water resources. India is a federation of states,
therefore to lay down uniform law and policy it is essential to identify and incorporate those
tenets, which are common and applicable to all the states. If analyzed, surface water, soil water
and underground water are manifestations of a single resource that can be managed. If there is
a deliberated policy based on scientific study of these resources, the water law in India can be
given a coordinated shape.

Other Deficiencies

Laws concerning water have grown in a piecemeal and ad hoc manner without a clearly
articulated conceptual basis in respect to fundamental, as the nature and content of water. There
are serious questions in relation to the states authority in regulating the use of water and the
manner in which this authority is to be exercised. Governments, both central and state, claim
the right of eminent domain over water and absolute right. Where and how it is to be developed
and how it is to be managed and to make and change entitlements and allocation is at their
discretion.

13
Entry 17 List II i.e. State List 7th Schedule of the Constitution of India 1950.
14
Laws that are governed by private property.
15
Jus gentium, variously translated as law of all peoples or law of all nations. Application of jus gentium gave
birth to the doctrine of public trust. During the 13th century, public trust entered English common law through
the Magna Carta.
16
The Supreme Court has been influenced and rightly so by the exercise of the EU. in the Water Framework
Directive of the European Union issued in 2000, the 27 member-nations, with diverse traditions and culture, are
working towards changing their water laws to achieve a common vision based on a uniform set of principles
inherent in jus gentium.

15
Vesting eminent domain in the state without setting any limits to the exercise of its
discretionary power leaves too much room for arbitrariness. The danger is increased many fold
where all the relevant functions development and management, implementing regulatory
functions, redressal of grievances and conflict resolution are taken by the executive arm of the
government. Since the state is supposed to serve the interest of its citizenry, one would think
that the regulatory functions regarding development and management of the resource should
be vested with the bodies independent of the executive agencies. Making and changing rules
of allocation and entitlement should be decided through a transparent process.

Another lacuna is the lack of clearly defined criteria for determining the entitlements of
different claimants to the common pool resources in a river basin. Thus, central legislation does
not specify the basis for deciding the entitlement of riparian states. In the international context,
two different criteria have been advocated as the basis for sharing water in a basin flowing
through different states: the Harmon Principle and the Helinsky/Dublin Rules. The former
recognizes the right of a region to use the water, which flows through it while the latter is based
on the optimum utilization of the basins resources for the common benefit of all its inhabitants.
In India there is no formal recognition of either principle even in respect of interstate rivers.
Tribunals have tended to use a combination of these two principles. None of the state
governments have laws or executive notifications specifying the basis for water allocation
between different segments of basins falling with in their territories. States are largely free to
change the allocation of water between and within a particular system and between uses (for
example between irrigation and water supply) at their discretion without observing any
consistent application of clearly defined principles and procedures laid down by law.

16
Conclusion

There is no meaning to Right to Life without Right to Water. If right to water is not properly
implemented the other fundamental rights such as right to health. Right to shelter, right to air,
right to good environment, etc. would also become futile. Water Law is important for Indias
economic, social and ecological development. The existing legal framework inherited mostly
from the colonial period and the Water Law in India has developed through several Acts and
in an ad hoc manner. This started to change with the progressive realisation that existing laws
were inappropriate to ensure access to water to all for domestic purposes and inappropriate
because of the fast increasing use of a finite resource. While water law reforms are more than
welcome given existing problems with water, it is unlikely that law reforms based on the
principles put forward in the water sector reforms constitute an appropriate response. Ongoing
water law reforms may contribute to enhancing water management but they are conceptually
incapable of addressing the human right, social, environmental and health aspects of water.
Strategies concerning socio-legal aspects for the management of water system in India however
have so far remained grossly neglected. Hence there is a need for future work in water law to
devise an alternative socio-legal discourse and practice where the concerned authorities use
organic knowledge of water resource management as seriously as the as the scientific
knowledge, and work a consideration of peoples struggles for water resource management as
pursuit of human rights.

A cooperative bargaining framework suggests that water can be shared efficiently, with
compensating transfers as necessary, if initial water rights are well-defined, and if institutions
to facilitate and implement cooperative agreements are in place. Furthermore, delay in the
dimension of agreement over water can encourage inefficient, non-cooperative investments in
dams, irrigation, etc. In the pure conflict situation, which seems very relevant for Indian inter-
state disputes, a search for a negotiated solution may be futile, and quick movement to
arbitration or adjudication may be more efficient. In India, not only is this process slow, but
also effective binding arbitration does not exist. The threat point of no agreement has been the
outcome in several major disputes (e.g., Cauvery; Ravi-Beas). This in turn can have negative
impacts on economic growth. These impacts can be reduced by a more efficient design of
mechanisms for negotiating inter-state water disputes including a national water commission
independent of daily political pressures, a federated structure incorporating river basin
authorities and water user associations, and fixed time periods for negotiation and adjudication.

17
Bibliography

Articles:

1. Mohd Shawahiq Siddiqui, Water Policies and Legal Framework in India, Osmania
University, Hyderabad.
2. Mohit Singhvi, Water Management Law and Policy in India, M. S. Ramaiah College
of Law, Bangalore.
3. Alan Richards & Nirvikar Singh, Inter State Water Disputes in India: Institutions and
Policies, Department of Environmental Studies & Department of Economics,
University of California, Santa Cruz.

Online Sources:

1. http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l420-Water-Management.html
2. http://www.indiawaterportal.org
3. http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-opinion/the-supreme-court-river-water-
disputes/article1851490.ece

18