Water flows downward irrespective of boundaries demarcated by man. The geographical features are such that in India, many major rivers flow through political boundary of one or more states and have been a source of potential conflict. The nation has tried to resolve the conflicts using the constitutional machinery and the statutory framework evolved over time, but the political climate and culture prevalent in the country as at present have not proved to be conducive to the same, resulting in protracted settlement and adjudicatory processes, not helping any particular state. The Krishna water dispute is among these and has had a long history, not being satisfactorily settled till date. This paper traces the constitutional machinery and the statutory framework evolved over time, the main reasons for inter-state river water disputes, before discussing in some detail the Krishna river water dispute. The paper concludes that politicisation of inter-state water disputes is a hard fact that cannot be overlooked. Apparently, political compulsions of different parties and the perceived needs of the population of the states have been accentuating these disputes. Thus, institutional machinery has to be established whereby exchange of information, negotiations and collaborations can take place. These institutions may not and indeed cannot supplant the legal machinery in place, but may effectively supplement it. The proposed setting up of inter-state council, under Article 263, may be a step in the right direction.

Water flows downward irrespective of boundaries demarcated by man. The geographical features are such that in India many major rivers flow through political boundary of one or more states and have been a source of potential conflict. The nation has tried to resolve the conflicts using the constitutional machinery and the statutory framework evolved over time, but the political climate and culture prevalent in the country as at present have not proved to be conducive to the same, resulting in protracted settlement and adjudicatory processes, not helping any particular state. The Krishna water dispute is among these and has had a long history, not being satisfactorily settled till date. This paper traces the constitutional machinery and the statutory framework evolved over time, the main reasons for interstate river water dispute, before discussing in some detail the Krishna river water disputes. The second longest river in peninsular India, the Krishna flows through states of Maharashtra, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh and all three states have raised conflicting and overlapping claims over its waters resulting in a seemingly intractable situation.

Constitution of India and Inter-State River Water Disputes
India is a federal country with a strong tendency towards a unitary center. “Prior to independence, the emphasis of the Congress party was on securing more power to the provinces, but soon after independence, the political scenario changed and the need for power sharing devices were subordinated to the imperatives of state security and stability. Unity of the country was perceived as a paramount need. The second report of the of the Union Constitution Committee states, “We have come to the conclusion that the soundest framework for our constitution is a federation with a strong center.”1 The same philosophy is reflected in sharing of interstate rivers.

Law Review Journal, The Krishna River Water, Inter-State River Water Disputes, Union Constitution Committee states, Cauvery Water Dispute Tribunal, Statutory framework, Dispute: No End in Sight?