How Water Disputes are Impacting Maharashtra and Vidarbha

How Water Disputes are Impacting Maharashtra and Vidarbha

Maharashtra’s geography places it at the origin of several major river systems in India.

As an upper riparian state, it sits upstream in basins like the Krishna and the Godavari, as well as parts of the Narmada and Tapi.

Its location makes it a natural stakeholder in water-sharing arrangements with neighbouring states, including Karnataka, Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Gujarat.

A Network of Interstate Water Disputes

Disputes around the Krishna River involve Maharashtra, Karnataka, and Andhra Pradesh (now bifurcated into Andhra Pradesh and Telangana). These states rely on the Krishna for irrigation and drinking water.

The Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal (KWDT), constituted in the 1960s, allocated water to the three states. Maharashtra’s share was fixed at 560 TMC initially, later revised to around 666 TMC in a second tribunal.

Tensions resurfaced after the creation of Telangana, which sought to renegotiate allocations. While the Supreme Court ruled that Maharashtra and Karnataka’s shares should remain untouched, questions around intra-state distribution between Telangana and Andhra Pradesh remain unresolved.

The Krishna basin has also seen regular friction during droughts. Concerns have emerged over dam heights, especially at Alamatti in Karnataka. There have been seasons where states accused each other of drawing more than their share. In some cases, downstream states reported shortfalls during critical agricultural periods.

Maharashtra, managing dams like Ujjani and Koyna, faces scrutiny from downstream governments, especially when rainfall is low and release schedules tighten.

The Godavari basin dispute mirrors many of the Krishna-related issues but introduces a different set of dynamics due to the river’s size and spread.

The Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal (GWDT) created a framework for inter-state agreements in the late 1970s. While the arrangement worked for decades, new tensions emerged around specific projects.

One such case was the Babhli Barrage, constructed by Maharashtra on the Godavari, upstream of Telangana’s Sriram Sagar Dam. Telangana raised objections, alleging that Babhli threatened downstream availability. The Supreme Court permitted Maharashtra to operate the barrage but imposed restrictions on storage levels and formed a central monitoring committee to oversee compliance.

Another point of contention emerged around the Polavaram project in Andhra Pradesh. Though the project lies downstream, its full reservoir level has implications for upstream regions in Maharashtra and Odisha. The 150 ft full reservoir level, part of earlier agreements, was contested later due to fears of submergence in upstream villages. While Maharashtra has not actively pursued litigation on the matter, local concerns persist in areas expected to be submerged once the reservoir is filled.

Maharashtra and Telangana have also had to address project alignments around the Pranhita and Penganga rivers.

A proposed barrage at Tummidi Hatti, which could have flooded parts of Vidarbha, was adjusted after mutual discussion.

The project intake was relocated to Medigadda, minimising backwater impact. In another instance, both states cooperated on the Chanaka-Korata barrage along the Penganga, a joint initiative that allowed cost and water sharing.

These efforts reflect a mixed pattern. Some disputes escalate into legal battles; others are resolved through negotiation.

Beyond these, Maharashtra’s interactions with Madhya Pradesh over rivers like the Pench, Wardha, and Wainganga follow a different rhythm.

These rivers affect both the domestic water supply and agriculture in Vidarbha. The Pench, for instance, feeds into Nagpur and supports irrigation across the region. During low-rainfall periods, Madhya Pradesh has been reported to withhold water, affecting downstream availability.

Though governed by existing pacts rather than a tribunal award, the situation requires yearly political coordination. The absence of a formal mechanism creates friction whenever supply mismatches occur.

The Narmada and Tapi rivers involve Maharashtra to a lesser extent. Tribunal awards have already apportioned water among concerned states. In the case of the Narmada, Maharashtra received a modest share.

It did, however, raise concerns about the Sardar Sarovar Project in Gujarat due to expected submergence in its own districts. Although Maharashtra’s share is small, project-induced displacement affected tribal settlements, prompting debates around rehabilitation.

Delays and Limitations in Irrigation Projects

Delays and Limitations in Irrigation Projects

The Vidarbha region of Maharashtra is no stranger to water. Several tributaries of the Godavari pass through this area, and historical assessments have indicated significant potential for irrigation. However, project execution has not kept pace with planning.

The region has experienced delays in the implementation of irrigation projects, with some attributed to inter-state coordination challenges.

Vidarbha’s irrigation depends heavily on rivers like the Wainganga, Wardha, Pranhita, and Penganga. Many of these rivers flow across state borders. Legal restrictions under tribunal allocations and political disagreements have affected the development of projects intended to harness these rivers.

One of the largest projects in the region, the Gosikhurd Dam on the Wainganga, has faced numerous delays.

Though it lies entirely within Maharashtra, it functions within a river system that spans into Madhya Pradesh. Upstream activity in Madhya Pradesh affects inflows, and coordination remains necessary. The project has seen cost overruns and only partial realisation of its intended command area, affecting thousands of farmers who expected irrigation access years ago.

In the case of the Lower Penganga Project, initial proposals faced resistance due to cross-border concerns with Telangana. Agreement over shared resources and flood management took time. Although joint barrages like Chanaka-Korata have emerged as workable models, their limited scale means they do not fully address regional irrigation demands. Larger, multipurpose projects remain limited by the need for prolonged negotiation.

Another notable concern has been the Inchampalli project, originally envisioned on the Godavari to serve Maharashtra, Telangana, and Chhattisgarh.

Due to environmental, social, and political hurdles, the project never progressed beyond the planning stage. Its shelving symbolised a lost opportunity to use an agreed share of water to support agriculture in eastern Maharashtra.

Many of these projects are tied to the state's broader inability to fully utilise its tribunal-allocated shares.

Reports suggest that Maharashtra has underused the Godavari waters earmarked for it. Tributaries like the Indravati and Pranhita, identified for development decades ago, remain largely untapped. This underutilisation directly affects irrigation coverage in Vidarbha.

The legal framework, while providing a basis for sharing, also introduces administrative caution. New projects require approvals that factor in downstream impacts. These procedures are time-intensive and often subject to delays, contributing to the slow pace of water development in Vidarbha.

Effects on Farming and Access to Water

Effects on Farming and Access to Water

The impact of water disputes and delayed projects in Vidarbha is reflected in the daily lives of its citizens. Agriculture remains the dominant occupation in the region, and irrigation is a critical requirement. The shortfall in irrigation infrastructure means most farming here remains rain-fed, leaving it vulnerable to monsoon variability.

Inconsistent water availability has limited the types of crops farmers can grow. While regions with assured irrigation shift to higher-value crops, Vidarbha continues to see reliance on cereals and cotton. Crop failures during poor rainfall years are frequent, and this uncertainty affects incomes across farming households.

Lack of irrigation has also discouraged crop diversification. Many small and marginal farmers hesitate to adopt water-intensive or long-gestation crops due to the unpredictability of supply. As a result, productivity remains low compared to national averages. This situation is compounded by the fact that several districts within Vidarbha report high agricultural indebtedness.

The disparity between Vidarbha and other parts of Maharashtra, particularly the western region, adds to the frustration. Western Maharashtra has benefitted from consistent irrigation expansion through Krishna basin projects. In contrast, Vidarbha’s development has been constrained by geography, legal hurdles, and project delays.

Drinking water supply also suffers due to inter-state water issues. Nagpur City, one of Vidarbha’s largest urban centres, draws its water from the Pench reservoir, located upstream in Madhya Pradesh. Any withholding of flow by Madhya Pradesh directly affects the city’s supply.

There have been seasons where water scarcity has forced municipalities to reduce pressure or supply hours. Other urban and rural areas face similar problems, with tanker services becoming essential during dry months.

Several rural settlements still rely on groundwater. In some areas, excessive withdrawal has led to depletion, and what remains is affected by salinity or fluoride. Planned surface water schemes often hinge on upstream releases or shared infrastructure. When these do not materialise as expected, the fallback is a system that is expensive and environmentally unsustainable.

Water disputes also influence decisions around industrial development. Projects that require a steady water supply are delayed or diverted due to uncertainty. This affects employment prospects and further limits opportunities for local communities.

In Vidarbha, where migration to urban centres is common during drought years, water shortages add pressure to an already limited labour market.

Other affected groups include fishing communities that depend on river systems. Reduced flow or changes in water levels affect fish populations and disrupt local markets. Cultural and religious activities that involve river access also face constraints during periods of restricted flow.

Displacement arising from water infrastructure projects, although less frequent than in earlier decades, remains a relevant concern.

Coordinated Water Use and Interstate Management

The scale of river systems crossing Maharashtra’s borders means that disputes are not a singular event but part of ongoing administrative processes. The role of water tribunals and the central government has been to formalise allocations and oversee project implementation where necessary.

In cases like Krishna and Godavari, tribunals have played a decisive role in distributing water among states. However, not all water systems have formal tribunal awards.

For rivers like Pench and Wainganga, sharing is managed through intergovernmental agreements. These arrangements rely on regular dialogue, and their success depends on the political climate and administrative cooperation at the time.

States monitor each other’s use closely. When Maharashtra constructs or operates a dam, downstream states raise concerns over compliance with the agreed quantum. Even minor deviations or delays in release can trigger strong responses. This level of scrutiny means that every project must be carefully planned, executed, and communicated.

Institutions like the Godavari River Management Board, set up under the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, help in managing disputes between Telangana and Andhra Pradesh.

Maharashtra is not under the board’s direct oversight, but its actions are often discussed in board meetings. This creates a situation where informal monitoring continues despite formal jurisdiction limits.

The necessity to stay within tribunal allocations leads to a conservative approach. Project plans are vetted repeatedly, and any potential impact on downstream flows must be modelled and approved. These processes, while aimed at fairness, often prolong execution timelines. In practice, this means that even when there is water available, mechanisms for its use remain tied up in formalities.

Even cooperative efforts take time to implement. Maharashtra and Telangana, despite reaching agreements on barrages, have needed several years to complete modest infrastructure. While such projects show that collaboration is possible, the scale of benefit remains small compared to the region’s overall requirements.

Concerns also extend to environmental impacts. Projects that alter river flows are scrutinised for downstream consequences. Maintaining minimum environmental flows is now part of many agreements, and states are required to demonstrate compliance.

For Maharashtra, this adds another layer of planning, particularly in areas where rivers support forests or wildlife.

While disputes may not always escalate into full-scale conflicts, their presence influences every stage of water management in Maharashtra.

In regions like Vidarbha, where rivers flow across these lines, every drop is accounted for.

From farms that depend on rainfall to towns that draw from distant reservoirs, the path of water remains closely tied to negotiation, law, and infrastructure.

Through agreements signed decades ago or meetings held last month, what passes between states becomes more than a resource. It shapes daily life.

Reference

• Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal. (1976). KWDT I Award. Retrieved from https://jalshakti-dowr.gov.in

• Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal II. (2010). KWDT II Draft Award. Retrieved from https://jalshakti-dowr.gov.in

• Supreme Court of India. (2013). State of Andhra Pradesh v. State of Maharashtra (Babhli Barrage Case). Retrieved from https://main.sci.gov.in

• Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal. (1980). GWDT Award. Retrieved from https://jalshakti-dowr.gov.in

• Central Water Commission. (2024). Water Resources Reports on Krishna and Godavari Basins. Retrieved from https://cwc.gov.in

• NITI Aayog. (2021). Composite Water Management Index. Retrieved from https://niti.gov.in

• Ministry of Jal Shakti. (2023). Godavari River Management Board Proceedings. Retrieved from https://jalshakti-dowr.gov.in

• Maharashtra Water Resources Department. (2022). Status of Irrigation Projects in Vidarbha. Retrieved from https://wrd.maharashtra.gov.in

• Planning Commission. (2012). Report on Vidarbha Irrigation Backlog. Retrieved from https://planningcommission.nic.in