River water disputes among the states

Seventy-eight years after India attained independence, inter-state water disputes continue to haunt the nation, undermining agricultural stability, drinking water security, and regional harmony. Despite repeated legal interventions, tribunals, and political negotiations, rivers remain a source of conflict rather than cooperation among states. The recent controversies surrounding the Almatti Dam in Karnataka have once again brought these unresolved issues into sharp focus.

The Krishna River, which flows through Karnataka, Telangana, and Andhra Pradesh, has historically been a flashpoint. After the bifurcation of the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh in 2014, disputes over Krishna waters intensified. Karnataka’s decision to utilize the full capacity of the Almatti Dam has triggered concerns in Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, reviving memories of past conflicts over water sharing.

Constructed in phases, the Almatti Dam initially had a full reservoir level of 1,705 feet in 1995. This was later raised to 1,715 feet in 2000 and then to 1,720 feet in 2005. During these elevations, the then united Andhra Pradesh government had opposed increasing the dam’s height, citing downstream impacts. Yet Karnataka pursued the increments, prioritizing irrigation and drinking water needs for its own farmers and citizens. Currently, Karnataka is not raising the dam height beyond its existing level but intends to fully utilize its storage capacity to retain water, ensuring efficient management for agricultural and domestic use. Earlier, even though the full reservoir level was 1,720 feet, actual storage rarely reached this level, with only around 207 TMC (thousand million cubic feet) utilized. Now, the state aims to manage 303 TMC effectively through appropriate land acquisition and reservoir management. For this purpose, Karnataka received approval on September 17, 2025, and plans to acquire 1.33 lakh acres.

The announcement has triggered protests in Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, and Maharashtra, particularly from Telugu-speaking states that fear significant losses. If the Almatti reservoir reaches its full capacity, downstream states may not receive Krishna waters in sufficient quantities for irrigation or drinking purposes. Heavy rainfall in the upstream region would take considerable time to reach downstream districts, potentially delaying sowing seasons and affecting crop cycles. Geographically, downstream states like Telangana and Andhra Pradesh sometimes gain certain advantages from river flows, but the current situation leaves them vulnerable to losses without any corresponding benefit.

Historical allocations under the Bachawat Tribunal assigned 560 TMC to Maharashtra, 700 TMC to Karnataka, and 800 TMC to united Andhra Pradesh. Following the bifurcation, Andhra Pradesh received 512 TMC, and Telangana 299 TMC. Water disputes over Krishna reservoirs such as Nagarjuna Sagar and Srisailam have persisted for decades, often triggered by drinking water and hydroelectric power concerns. Almatti now threatens to become another prolonged source of conflict between the states.

Disputes over projects and water sharing are not confined to Krishna alone. The Godavari River has also been a source of contention. Polavaram, despite being in Andhra Pradesh, has faced decades of delays over sharing and submergence issues with neighboring states. The proposed Banakacherla project, designed to divert Godavari floodwaters to the Penna basin, is currently a flashpoint between Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. While Andhra Pradesh argues for its construction to ensure water for Rayalaseema, Telangana contends that it violates the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act and could affect its share of river waters. Similar disagreements persist over Palamuru-Rangareddy, Nettampadu, Handri-Neeva, and Veligonda projects.

Water disputes are rarely constructive; instead, they often exacerbate political tensions. Long-standing conflicts such as Cauvery between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, and Mullaperiyar between Kerala and Tamil Nadu, demonstrate how protracted disputes can remain unresolved for decades, causing local grievances and interstate mistrust. When political motives intertwine with water management, tensions escalate, affecting farmers, rural communities, and overall governance.

The current situation calls for urgent intervention. States must proactively negotiate water-sharing arrangements, respecting both upstream and downstream requirements. The central government has a critical role as a mediator, ensuring equitable distribution without political bias. Upstream states attempting to maximize benefits while downstream regions bear the brunt of floodwaters or water scarcity reflects a short-term opportunistic approach that undermines long-term sustainability.

Effective water management must prioritize agricultural needs, drinking water security, and hydropower production over political advantage. If calculations of river water allocations continue to be influenced by electoral politics, these disputes will remain a perpetual source of tension, creating a cycle of conflict that benefits no one. The need of the hour is cooperative federalism in water governance, transparent allocation, and infrastructure planning that safeguards both upstream and downstream interests. Only then can India hope to resolve its inter-state water disputes and ensure a sustainable future for all citizens reliant on its rivers.