Major conflict or disagreement over inter-state river waters in India is due to desire of initial allocation of property right over water, desperation of water scarce areas, political ambitions, historical troubles, and non performance of existing laws.

Why interstate water disputes are looming:

• The most prominent problem faced by interstate water dispute   is that it do not have any effective authority for the implementation of the order of the tribunal. The Tribunal can only give an award but cannot enforce its implementation.  It  also don’t have any  powers of punishment for ‘contempt’.
•  The awards of these tribunals, although supposedly final and binding, have been challenged in the courts. The judicial process is essentially an long process which further delay the dispute. e.g., Cauvery water dispute.
• Concerns of environmental impacts, rehabilitation measures have not been effectively assessed.
• There are always inordinate delays in the setting up of tribunals and deciding the award. The right to have a dispute referred to a tribunal under IWSDA (Inter water state dispute act)is dependent on the opinion of the Central Government that the matter cannot be settled by negotiation.
• Center has sometimes intervened directly as well, but in the most intractable cases, such as the sharing of the Ravi-Beas waters among Haryana, Jammu and Kashmir, Rajasthan, and Punjab, central intervention, too, has been unsuccessful.
• Water is an emotional issue as large parts of the country are dominated by agriculture. This issues has been frequently used for mobilization of people for political purposes.
• Scarcity of water in certain areas.
• Improper assessment of the river water often creates a situation of threat

What can be the possible solution?

• Article 263 of the Indian Constitution envisages establishing an Inter-State Council (ISC). The council provides a forum for discussion on complex public policy and governance issues having a bearing on centre-state relations or with an inter-state dimensions. Because the council is a constitutionally mandated body, and has now built a wealth of experience in dealing with matters that are of common interest to states, it can play a useful role in facilitating dialogue and discussion towards resolving conflicts.
• River Basin Organization (RBO) can be set up under the River Boards Act of 1956 (RBA), legislated under article 56 of the Union list.  These are empowered to regulate and develop inter-state rivers and their basins. The board must comprise of members with expertise in fields such as irrigation, water and soil conservation and finance.
• There should be proper mediation that employs a neutral person or persons to facilitate negotiations between the disputing parties so as to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution. This process was successful when World Bank become a mediator for handling water dispute between India and Pakistan.
• It has been recommended by the Sarkaria Commission that the tribunal awards should be equated with the status of the decree of the Supreme Court. Appeals to the court in large number to the court reflects the failure of the government in the handling water related disputes.
• To develop the machinery for settlement of inter-state river Water disputes, Section 4 of the Act must be amended setting a time frame for constituting the Tribunal by the Centre.
• There is a need to set up a permanent tribunal for such disputes instead of creating one each time. Then it has been suggested by the NCRWC(National Commission to review the working of the Constitution) that the Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956 be repealed and in its place a more comprehensive parliamentary legislation should be enacted.

Innovative solutions

• Declaration of water as a national resource. This will help in scientific assessment and distribution of water among the states.
• Interlinking of rivers may also result in solution to these disputes in the context of availability of water.