“Water
dispute" means any dispute or difference between two or more State
Governments with respect to:
·
The use, distribution or
control of the waters of, or in, any inter-State river or river valley or
·
The interpretation
of the terms of any agreement relating to the use, distribution or control of
such waters or the implementation of such agreement or
·
The levy of
any water rate in contravention of the prohibition contained in section
Interstate River Water Disputes Act – 1956 (IRWD Act)
·
was first enacted on 28 August 1956 by the Indian
parliament under Article 262 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 states/regional
governments. This
Act further has undergone amendments subsequently and its most recent amendment
took place in the year 2002.
· Amendment 2002: This amendment 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. A
permanent water dispute tribunal is contemplated
to resolve the growing number of interstate river water disputes expediously.
SARKARIA
COMMISSION on Inter-State River
Water Disputes
Ø Once an application under Section 3 of the Inter-State River Water
Disputes Act (33 of 1956) is received from a State, it should be mandatory on
the Union Government to constitute a Tribunal within a period not exceeding one
year from the date of receipt of the application of any disputant State. The
Inter- State River Water Disputes Act may be suitably amended for this purpose.
Ø
The Inter-State Water
Disputes Act should be amended to empower the Union Government to appoint a
Tribunal, suo-moto, if necessary, when it is satisfied that such a dispute
exists in fact.
Ø
There should be a Data
Bank and information system at the national level and adequate machinery should
be set up for this purpose at the earliest. There should also be a provision in
the Inter-State Water Disputes Act that States shall be required to give
necessary data for which purpose the Tribunal may be vested with powers of a
court.
Ø
The inter-State Water
Disputes Act should be amended to ensure that the award of a Tribunal becomes
effective within five years from the date of constitution of a Tribunal. If,
however, for some reasons, a Tribunal feels that the five years period has to
be extended, the Union Government may on a reference made by the Tribunal
extend its term.
Ø The Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956 should be amended so that
a Tribunal's award has the same force and sanction behind it as an order or
decree of the Supreme Court to make a Tribunal's award really binding.
PUNCHI COMMISSION: recommendation on water disputes:-
(i) The Tribunal should be a multidisciplinary
body presided over by a Judge.
(ii) It should follow a more
participatory and conciliatory approach.
(iii) The statute should prescribe a time limit
for clarificatory or supplementary orders. Appeals to the Supreme
Court should be prescribed under the statute; and in the long run; and Reference
to a Tribunal should be invariably linked with constitution of inter-State
River Boards charged with an integrated watershed approach towards inter-State
rivers.
(iv)The initiating party must indicate the
efforts it has made in resolution of its grievances before a River Board.
(v) The Government of India must indicate the
stand it took before the Board and in case a Board has not been constituted the
reasons for not having constituted one as well as the likely time frame in case
the process is underway.
Constitution of Tribunal
1. When any request under section 3 is received from any
State Government in respect of any water dispute and the
Central Government is of opinion that the water dispute cannot
be settled by negotiations, the Central Government shall, within a period not
exceeding one year from the date of receipt of such
request, by notification in the Official Gazette,
constitute a Water Disputes Tribunal
for the adjudication of the water dispute: Provided that any dispute settled by
a Tribunal before the commencement of
Inter-State Water Disputes (Amendment) Act,
2002 shall not be re-opened"
2. The Tribunal shall consist of a Chairman and
two other members nominated in this behalf by the Chief Justice of India from
among persons who at the time of such nomination are Judges of the Supreme
Court or of a High Court.
3. The
Central Government may, in consultation with the Tribunal, appoint two or
more persons as assessors to advise the Tribunal in the
proceedings before it.
|
Sl. No.
|
Name of the Tribunal
|
|
1.
|
Ravi & Beas Water
Tribunal
|
|
2.
|
Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal
|
|
3.
|
Krishna Water Disputes
Tribunal
|
|
4.
|
Vansadhara Water Disputes Tribunal
|
|
5.
|
Mahadayi Water
Disputes Tribunal
|
“the Cauvery issue is
about opposition to the release of fixed amounts of water to Tamil Nadu, the
Krishna issue is about deciding the quantum of water to be divided between
Karnataka and other States”
CONSTITUTION OF THE CAUVERY
RIVER AUTHORITY
There shall be an Authority under this scheme to be
known as the Cauvery River Authority (hereinafter referred to as the
Authority). The Authority shall consist of the following:
(a) Prime Minister of India à Chairperson
(b) Chief Minister of Karnataka Member
(c) Chief Minister of Kerala Member
(d) Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu Member
(e) Chief Minister of Pondicherry Member
The Secretary in-charge of the Ministry of the
Central Government dealing with water resources shall be the Secretary of the
Authority.
POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF THE
AUTHORITY
i. The role of the Authority shall be to give effect
to the implementation of the interim order dated twenty fifth June, 1991 of the
Tribunal and all its related subsequent orders.
ii. The Authority shall frame rules and regulations
for the conduct of its business.
iii. The Authority may convene meetings as and when
necessary.
“In a developing country like India, the interstate river
water dispute must be resolved quickly so that water resources could be
utilized and harnessed properly for economic development. One of the measures
could be to declare all the major rivers as national property and national
schemes under the central assistance should he launched for the development of
their total command area with partial involvement of the concerned states.
Separate corporations on the line of the Damodar Valley Corporation may be
useful in this direction.”
