ACADEMIC YEAR: 2021-2023

SUBJECT: LAW, ETHICS & GOVERNANCE

TOPIC: WATER TRIBUNALS

GUIDED BY:- SUBMITTED BY:-

DR. JYOTI CHOUHAN SHIVANSH AGRAWAL

M.B.A. (PUB.AD) II SEM

ROLL NO: - 2123418

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would want to express my heartfelt gratitude to DR.JYOTI CHOUHAN
Without whom the task would not have been completed.
I’d also like to express my gratitude to my friends and family members for 
Their recommendations and input throughout the course of the project.
I will never forget their encouragement, and I hope that I will be shown the 
same kindness and direction in my future endeavors.
Interstate River Water Disputes Act

The Interstate River Water Disputes Act, 1956

Parliament of India

show

Long title

Citation Act No. 33 of 1956

Enacted by Parliament of India

Assented to 28 August 1956

 INTRODUCTION

The Interstate River Water Disputes Act, 1956 (IRWD Act) is an Act of

the Parliament of India enacted under Article 262 of Constitution of India on
the eve of reorganization of states on linguistic basis to resolve the water
disputes that would arise in the use, control and distribution of an interstate
river or river valley.  Article 262 of the Indian Constitution provides a role for
the Central government in adjudicating conflicts surrounding inter-state
rivers that arise among the state/regional governments. 
 This Act further has undergone amendments subsequently and its most
recent amendment took place in the year 2002.
River waters use / harnessing is included in states jurisdiction (entry 17
of state list, Schedule 7 of Indian Constitution). However, union government
with parliament approval can make laws on regulation and development of
inter-State rivers and river valleys to the extent such water resources are
directly under its control when expedient in the public interest (entry 56
of union list, Schedule 7 of Indian Constitution). Deodars Valley
Corporation, NHPC, River Boards Act 1956, etc under the control of union
government, are preferable to entry 56 of the union list.
When union government wants to take over a interstate river project under
its control by law (as provided in the constitution) from States per entry 56
of the union list, it has to take approval of the riparian states' legislature
assemblies before passing such bill in the Parliament per Article 252 of the
constitution. When public interest is served, President may also establish
an interstate council as per Article 263 to inquire and recommend on the
dispute that has arisen between the states of India.
 Water Disputes

IRWD Act is applicable only to interstate rivers / river valleys. An action of

one state should affect the interests of one or more other states. Then only
water dispute is deemed to have arisen under IRWD Act (section 3). It can
be divided into two independent parts for clarity purpose in understanding
the techno-legal application of IRWD Act.

Actions of a Downstream State Affecting the Interest

of an Upstream State

A downstream state's action can affect the upstream state interest

only in one case. I.e. when a downstream state is building a dam /
barrage near its state boundary and submerging the territory of an
upstream state on permanent / temporary basis. Other than this
action, no other action of a downstream state could affect the
upstream states interest which they have been using for
economical, ecological and spiritual/ religious aspects. The
meaning of the word ‘interest’ in this context is concern /
importance / significance / relevance / consequence of losing the
prevailing water use or purpose.
Actions of an Upstream State Affecting the Interest of
a Downstream State

Whereas all the actions of an upstream state to use or control or distribute

the water of an interstate river can affect the downstream states in one way
or other. The following are some examples but not complete:

1. Consuming river water for any beneficial use such as irrigation,

drinking water, industrial, recreation, recharging of ground water,
ground water use, enhanced evaporation losses, enhancing rain
water use efficiency, obstructing non flood flows of the river,
transferring water to outside the river basin, etc. (i.e. any man
made /aided action of converting water into water vapor & losing to
atmosphere by evapotranspiration / evaporation processes and also
transferring river water outside the river basin). This is generally done
by constructing water storage reservoirs and subsequently using
water for above purposes.
2. Quality of water can also be diminished / altered/ controlled in the
action of using water. It would take place by accumulating
the dissolved salts in the remaining water after its use. The dissolved
salts content of water increases due to its consumption and also
addition of more salts by anthropogenic activity. Also causing water
more silt laden / turbid is a man made water quality alteration which
can be caused by mining and deforestation activities. Bringing water
from other river basins for upstream states use also effects water
quality in downstream states
3. Decrease in water availability:- When an upstream state
contemplates water use, it would block the lean season river flows
initially by constructing low cost barrages and tries to store the peak
flood waters ultimately by constructing massive water storage
reservoirs. In this process the river flow regime is altered drastically
converting it ephemeral / dry in most of the time except during floods.
[5]
 It also alters the ecology of the river located in downstream states
affecting its riverine vegetation and aquatic flora & fauna. Already the
delta area of rivers are eroding / shrinking when adequate river water
is not reaching sea.

Constitution of Tribunal

Whenever the riparian states are not able to reach amicable agreements on
their own in sharing of an interstate river waters, section 4 of IRWD Act
provides dispute resolution process in the form of a Tribunal. As per
section 5.2 of the Act, the tribunal shall not only adjudicate but also
investigate the matters referred to it by the central government and forward
a report setting out the facts with its decisions. It implies that the tribunal
responsibility is not limited to adjudication of issues raised by the
concerned states and also investigation of other aspects which are in
public domain such as water pollution, salt export requirement, water
quality deterioration, flood control, sustainability of river basin productivity
& its ecology, environmental flow requirements, climate change effects,
etc. When the tribunal final verdict issued based on the deliberations on
the draft verdict is accepted by the central government and notified in the
official gazette, the verdict becomes law and binding on the states and
union government for implementation. In case the constitutional rights of
states are ingresses upon by the tribunal award in any manner, union
government is obliged to take the consent of parliament and all riparian
states under Article 252 of the constitution before publishing the tribunal
awards in the official gazette. When pronounced in the ambit of IRWD Act
and the Indian constitution, the tribunal's verdict after its publication in the
official gazette is equivalent to Supreme Court verdict as per section 6 of
IRWD Act.
 Amendment 2002

This amendment (second paragraph of section 4 (1) of the Act)

specifically does not permit altering the prevailing tribunal
verdicts issued before the year 2002 (i.e. but not the tribunal
awards issued after the year 2002). Thus this amendment bars
the tribunals to give any time period/validity for constituting a
new tribunal. This is to keep provision to resolve fresh water
disputes which were not addressed by earlier tribunals/
agreements as and when they surface.

Amendment Bills

A permanent water dispute tribunal, with its members from

sitting/retired judges of Supreme Court or High courts (maximum five
including chairman and vice chairman) and technical experts
(maximum three), is proposed to resolve the growing number of
interstate river water disputes expeditiously. A tribunal bench shall
have one technical expert member and one judicial member with
chairman or vice chairman out of the members of the permanent
water dispute tribunal.
Section 5 (2a) of the amended Act mandated that tribunal report shall
also prescribe for the distribution of water among the states during
distress situations arising from shortage in river water availability.
Union government is contemplating to bring a new act in place of
River Boards Act, 1956 which is presently purely an advisory body of
the union government. The new bill called "River basin Management
Bill" would constitute River Basin Organizations for each interstate
river basin with two tier structure.

Inter-State River Water Disputes

Amendment Bill, 2019

The Inter-State River Water Disputes Amendment Bill was introduced

in Lok Sabha on 25th July,2019 by the minister of Jal Shakti,
Mr.Gajendra Singh Shekhawat. It amends the Inter-State River Water
Disputes Act, 1956.  The Act provides for the adjudication of disputes
relating to waters of inter-state rivers and river valleys.

 Under the Act, a state government may request the central

government to refer an inter-state river dispute to a Tribunal for
adjudication. If the central government is of the opinion that the
dispute cannot be settled through negotiations, it is required to set
up a Water Disputes Tribunal for adjudication of the dispute, within
a year of receiving such a complaint.  The Bill seeks to replace this
mechanism.

 Disputes Resolution Committee: Under the Bill, when a state puts

in a request regarding any water dispute, the central government
will set up a Disputes Resolution Committee (DRC), to resolve the
dispute amicably.  The DRC will consist of a Chairperson and
experts with at least 15 years of experience in relevant sectors, to
be nominated by the central government.  It will also include one
member from each state (at Joint Secretary Level), who are party to
the dispute, to be nominated by the concerned state government.

 The DRC will seek to resolve the dispute through negotiations,

within one year (extendable by six months), and submit its report
to the central government. If a dispute cannot be settled by the
DRC, the central government will refer it to the Inter-State River
 Water Disputes Tribunal.  Such referral must be made within three
months from the receipt of the report from the DRC.

 Tribunal: The central government will set up an Inter-State River

Water Disputes Tribunal, for the adjudication of water disputes.
This Tribunal can have multiple benches.  All existing Tribunals
will be dissolved, and the water disputes pending adjudication
before such existing Tribunals will be transferred to the new
Tribunal.

 Composition of the Tribunal: The Tribunal will consist of a

Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson, three judicial members,
and three expert members.  They will be appointed by the
central government on the recommendation of a Selection
Committee.  Each Tribunal Bench will consist of a
Chairperson or Vice-Chairperson, a judicial member, and
an expert member.  The central government may also
appoint two experts serving in the Central Water
Engineering Service as assessors to advise the Bench in
its proceedings.  The assessor should not be from the
state which is a party to the dispute.

 Time frames: Under the Act, the Tribunal must give its decision
within three years, which may be extended by two years.  Under
the Bill, the proposed Tribunal must give its decision on the
dispute within two years, which may be extended by another
year.Under the Act, if the matter is again referred to the Tribunal by
a state for further consideration, the Tribunal must submit its
report to the central government within a period of one year. This
period can be extended by the central government.  The Bill
amends this to specify that such extension may be up to a
maximum of six months.
 Dams Safety Act, 2021

Parliament passed the Dams Safety Act, 2021 under article

256 to monitor the safety of aging dams located on all rivers
of India. As it is covering all the rivers in India instead of
interstate rivers, petition was filed in High Court against such
act challenging its constitutional validity.

Tribunal Awards

Till now three tribunal awards are notified in official gazette by the
Government of India. These are water dispute tribunals allocating
river water use by the riparian states for Krishna (tribunal 1), Godavari
and Narmada rivers. All these tribunal awards were issued before the
year 2002 which cannot be altered by the new tribunals. The tribunals
formed on sharing water of Ravi & Beas rivers, Cauvery / Kaveri river
Vamsadhara River Mahadayi / Mondovi and Krishna River (tribunal 2)
are either yet to pronounce the verdicts or the issued verdicts are to
be accepted by the Government of India.
Cauvery water disputes tribunal order was notified by the GoI on 20
February 2013 and later Supreme Court amended the tribunal order.
The Vamsadhara tribunal pronounced its final verdict in September
2017 and permitted AP state to construct the side weir at Katragedda
and Neradi barrage.
In March 2018, Mahanadi Water Disputes Tribunal is formed on the
direction of Supreme Court to adjudicate water sharing dispute
between Odisha and Chhattisgarh states.
The Mahanadi Water Tribunal pronounced its final verdict in August
2018 and permitted Karnataka state to use water outside the basin for
drinking water use. The tribunal has not vacated the stay order on the
execution of works by Karnataka till the verdict is notified by a gazette
order by the Union.

Establishment of Authorities to Implement a

Tribunal Verdict

Under Section 6A of this Act, central government may frame

a scheme or schemes to give effect to the decision of a
tribunal. Each scheme has provision to establish an authority
for implementation of a tribunal verdict. However, every
scheme and all its regulations shall be approved by the
parliament. When a tribunal verdict, after formally gazette by
the union government, stipulates to establish the verdict
implementation authority/board, the same shall be complied
by the union government as the tribunal verdict is equal
to Supreme Court verdict. As per Articles 53 & 142 of the
constitution, it is the duty of the President to enforce the
tribunal/supreme court order/verdict without time delay till
the Parliament, under Section 6A of this Act, decides against
or makes modifications to the already established
implementation board/authority.
In the case of Cauvery River basin, SC directed the Got to set
up a temporary Supervisory Committee to implement the
tribunal order till the constitution of Cauvery Management
Board by GoI. GoI established the said temporary
Supervisory Committee on 22 May 2013. In the case of Babli
barrage dispute, SC itself constituted the Supervisory
Committee to implement the water sharing agreement
between Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh in middle
Godavari sub basin.
After nearly 7 years, the KRMB and Godavari River
Management Board are notified by the central govt as an
autonomous bodies and their project wise functions are
stipulated for implementation.

Data Bank and Information System

Under Section 9A of this Act, central government shall maintain a

data bank and information system at national level for each river
basin. State governments shall provide all the data regarding
water resources, land, agriculture and matters related thereto as
requested by the central government. Central government is also
vested with powers to verify the data supplied by the state
governments. However, many state governments, e.g.,
Maharashtra, Chattishgarh, have not been furnishing the land use
data in their states (Tables 14 to 16 of Integrated Hydrological
Data Book, 2012) and Central Water Commission of MoWR is not
pursuing the matter earnestly to get the data which is vital in
water resources planning.