Discipline in water use key to resolving inter-State disputes: G.C. Tallur

At a recent gathering in Dharwad, former chief engineer and Public Works Secretary G.C. Tallur underscored that disciplined water use is the linchpin for easing inter‑State disputes over rivers such as the Mahadayi and Malaprabha. His remarks, delivered to an audience that included farmers, activists and policy‑makers from Karnataka, Goa and Maharashtra, echo a broader national conversation about how India’s water‑rich but increasingly stressed river basins are managed. The dialogue highlighted three inter‑linked themes: the need for judicious utilisation of allocated river water, the pressure of water‑intensive crops, and the emerging competition between agriculture and high‑tech industries for the same resource.

Inter‑State Allocations: A Legal Framework Under Pressure

The tribunal‑determined allocations for major river basins such as the Krishna, Cauvery and Godavari have long provided a legal basis for water sharing among riparian states. Tallur reminded participants that these allocations were calibrated to meet each state’s needs, assuming that farmers would avoid “water‑guzzling” crops. He noted that Karnataka’s share from these basins is theoretically sufficient to irrigate a substantial portion of its cultivated land, which spans roughly 128 lakh hectares out of a total geographical area of about 190 lakh hectares.

However, the practical reality diverges from the legal design. While tribunals have set the quantum of water for each state, the actual distribution on the ground remains uneven, especially for the millions of small and marginal farmers who dominate Karnataka’s agrarian landscape. The challenge, Tallur argued, is not merely about the quantum allocated but about the efficiency with which that water is deployed across the state’s diverse agro‑ecological zones.

Water‑Intensive Crops Amplify Demand

The expansion of crops such as sugarcane, banana and paddy has intensified irrigation demand, a trend Tallur linked directly to the growing strain on inter‑State water sharing. These crops, while lucrative, consume far more water per hectare than cereals like millets or pulses. Their proliferation has been facilitated by the availability of canal water, yet the same canals are now under pressure from competing uses.

Farmers’ reliance on these high‑value, water‑intensive crops is partly a response to market incentives and partly a hedge against erratic monsoon patterns. Tallur urged that cropping decisions be aligned with prevailing rainfall and water availability, a recommendation that resonates with the broader push for climate‑smart agriculture across India. The implication is clear: without a shift toward less water‑hungry crops or more efficient irrigation, the pressure on shared river resources is likely to intensify.

Technology’s Thirst: Data Centres and Cooling Needs

Amid the agricultural debate, farmer leader Shankar Ambli raised a new dimension of water competition: the cooling requirements of AI data centres. Ambli claimed that while the state hesitated to release five thousand million cubic feet (TMC) of water for irrigation, it was simultaneously allocating fifteen TMC to meet the cooling needs of these high‑tech facilities.

This allegation spotlights the growing footprint of the technology sector in water‑scarce regions. Data centres, especially those powered by high‑performance computing, demand large volumes of water for thermal regulation. The claim that a three‑fold higher allocation is being diverted to technology underscores a perceived imbalance in policy priorities, prompting calls for a more nuanced appraisal of water budgeting that accounts for both agricultural livelihoods and emerging industrial demands.

Activist Perspectives: Balancing Development and Conservation

Environmental activists present at the event, including Nirmala Gouda, Sanjiv Kulkarni, Suresh Heblikar and Mahima Patil, offered a critical lens on both agricultural and industrial water use. While Ambli accused activists of applying “different standards” to agriculture versus technology, the activists themselves highlighted the broader ecological implications of unchecked water extraction.

Their stance reflects a growing consensus that water governance must integrate ecological sustainability with socio‑economic needs. The activists’ participation alongside farmer representatives signals an emerging platform where divergent interests can be negotiated, rather than being pitted against each other in a zero‑sum narrative.

Policy Gaps: From Allocation to On‑Ground Management

Tallur’s emphasis on “disciplined water management” points to a policy gap that extends beyond allocation formulas. Effective water distribution requires robust infrastructure, real‑time monitoring, and farmer‑centric extension services. The existing framework, built around tribunal awards, often lacks the mechanisms to enforce equitable and efficient water use at the micro‑level.

In Karnataka, the challenge is compounded by the fragmented nature of irrigation systems, many of which are antiquated and suffer from leakage and conveyance losses. Addressing these systemic inefficiencies could free up significant volumes of water, reducing the need for contentious re‑allocations between agriculture and industry.

Implications for Inter‑State Relations and Future Disputes

The Mahadayi and Malaprabha rivers, both subjects of ongoing inter‑State negotiations, exemplify the broader dynamics at play. As states grapple with internal water stress, their external claims become more assertive, potentially inflaming disputes. Tallur’s call for judicious use of allocated water is a preventive measure: if each state can demonstrate efficient utilisation, it strengthens its negotiating position while fostering goodwill.

Moreover, the dialogue in Dharwad illustrates the importance of multi‑stakeholder platforms that bring together policymakers, farmers, activists and industry representatives. Such forums can pre‑empt escalation by surfacing concerns early and fostering collaborative solutions, an approach that could be institutionalised across other river basins facing similar pressures.

Path Forward: Integrating Technology, Agriculture and Governance

The convergence of agricultural demands, technological expansion and environmental advocacy demands a holistic water governance model. Tallur’s remarks suggest that disciplined water use, coupled with efficient irrigation technologies—such as drip and sprinkler systems—could mitigate the pressure on shared rivers. Simultaneously, the tech sector could adopt alternative cooling methods, including air‑cooled systems or the use of reclaimed wastewater, thereby reducing its freshwater footprint.

For policymakers, the imperative is clear: align water allocation with sustainable usage patterns, incentivise crop diversification away from water‑intensive varieties, and embed water‑saving technologies across sectors. By doing so, Karnataka and its neighboring states can transform a potential flashpoint into a collaborative case study of resilient water management in a climate‑volatile era.

This article was produced with AI-assisted research and editorial support. Reporting is based on the source material cited below. Sources: The Hindu; thehindu.com; Global1.News (26 October 2026).

By Dr. Raj Patel, Staff Writer