Inter-State water dispute over river diversion requires tribunal reference and interim status quo protection

An inter-State river diversion dispute over a side channel weir and flood flow canal was treated as a water dispute because it concerned use, distribution and control of river waters, and a prior sharing understanding did not bar a later controversy over unilateral diversion affecting downstream supply. Where genuine negotiation had failed and the request remained unresolved, the statutory scheme required the Central Government to constitute a Water Disputes Tribunal, and the writ jurisdiction could be used to prevent the dispute from becoming ineffective before reference. The writ petition was allowed, with directions to constitute and refer the dispute and maintain status quo meanwhile.

---

---

Issues: Whether the dispute between the two States regarding diversion of waters of an inter-State river through a side channel weir and flood flow canal was a "water dispute" within the meaning of the statute, and whether the Central Government could be directed to constitute a Water Disputes Tribunal with interim protection pending reference.

Analysis: The dispute concerned the use, distribution and control of waters of an inter-State river, and the earlier understanding between the States to share the waters did not exclude a later controversy over unilateral diversion affecting downstream supply. The request made to the Central Government had remained unresolved for an extended period despite attempts at negotiated settlement. In the statutory scheme, once a genuine water dispute exists and negotiation fails, the Central Government is required to constitute a Tribunal, and the amendment to the constitution-of-tribunal provision introduced a time limit for doing so. Until a Tribunal is constituted and the dispute is referred, the constitutional writ jurisdiction can be invoked to prevent the dispute from being rendered ineffective.

Conclusion: The dispute was held to be a water dispute under the statute, and the writ petition was allowed. The Central Government was directed to constitute a Water Disputes Tribunal and refer the dispute, and the other State was directed to maintain status quo pending such constitution.

---