Water Governance in India: Key Policies and Implementation Challenges

Water sits at the centre of almost every developmental challenge in India, from agriculture and public health to urbanisation and climate adaptation. Yet despite being the world’s largest user of groundwater and home to several major river systems, the country continues to struggle with how to allocate, manage and protect this finite resource. The reason lies less in scarcity and more in governance. Who decides who gets water, on what terms, and with what accountability? Understanding the architecture of water governance, its flagship policies, and the obstacles blocking effective execution offers a clear window into one of the most consequential policy domains shaping development today.

The architecture of water governance 🔗

Water governance in India operates on a layered structure that reflects the federal nature of the Constitution. The defining principle is that water is primarily a state subject under Entry 17 of the State List, while the Union government holds limited authority over inter-state rivers under Entry 56 of the Union List. This division creates both autonomy and friction in how water is managed.

The central level 🔗

At the apex, the Ministry of Jal Shakti, created in 2019 by merging the Ministry of Water Resources with the Ministry of Drinking Water and Sanitation, coordinates national water policy and major programmes. Technical bodies like the Central Water Commission (CWC) handle surface water planning, while the Central Ground Water Board (CGWB) oversees aquifer assessment and groundwater regulation. The National Water Resources Council (NWRC), chaired by the Prime Minister and including all chief ministers, is meant to be the highest political forum on water, though it has met only a handful of times since its creation in 1983.

The state level 🔗

States carry the heaviest operational burden. Departments of irrigation, public health engineering, and water resources design irrigation networks, manage dams, regulate groundwater extraction, and supply drinking water. State water policies, where they exist, build on the National Water Policy template but are tailored to regional hydrology and politics. This is where most planning and implementation actually happen, which is why uniform national reform has been so difficult.

The local level 🔗

The 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments devolved significant responsibilities to Panchayati Raj Institutions and urban local bodies. Gram Panchayats, Village Water and Sanitation Committees (VWSCs), and Water User Associations are expected to manage village-level drinking water, watershed projects, and irrigation distribution. In practice, their capacity varies enormously, but their role is central to community-led models that newer schemes are betting on.

Major policies and flagship programmes 🔗

India has built its policy framework on a mix of overarching policy documents and mission-mode schemes. Together, they reveal both the ambition and the evolving philosophy of water governance.

The National Water Policy 🔗

The first National Water Policy was adopted in 1987 and revised in 2002 and 2012. Each version reflected the priorities of its time, the original focused on resource development and supply augmentation, the 2002 revision introduced participatory irrigation management and water pricing, and the 2012 policy treated water as an economic good while emphasising equitable distribution and climate change adaptation. A draft 2020 policy prepared by a committee chaired by economist Mihir Shah proposed a paradigm shift toward demand management, crop diversification, and integrated basin-level planning. As analysts have noted, this draft has not been formally adopted even years after submission, leaving the 2012 policy as the operative national framework.

A persistent weakness of the National Water Policy is that it is advisory rather than legally binding. There is no overarching national water law, and policies rely on state cooperation for execution. This has often meant strong intent on paper but weak enforcement on the ground.

Jal Jeevan Mission 🔗

Launched in August 2019, the Jal Jeevan Mission aimed to provide functional household tap connections to every rural household by 2024, supplying at least 55 litres of safe water per person per day. The scheme was conceived with a total outlay of ₹3.6 lakh crore shared between the Centre and the states, and it places strong emphasis on community participation through VWSCs and the training of local women as water quality monitors.

The Mission’s expansion has been one of the largest rural infrastructure pushes in recent memory. According to government data, around 15.19 crore rural households (about 78.58 per cent) had tap water connections by October 2024, up from just 17 per cent at launch. Goa, Telangana, and a few smaller territories achieved full coverage early. However, the original 2024 deadline has now been formally extended, with completion targets revised toward 2028 to cover remaining households.

Atal Bhujal Yojana 🔗

While Jal Jeevan focuses on drinking water delivery, the Atal Bhujal Yojana targets the deeper structural problem of groundwater depletion. Launched in December 2019 with an outlay of ₹6,000 crore (jointly funded by the Government of India and the World Bank), Atal Jal is being implemented in 8,562 water-stressed Gram Panchayats across 80 districts in Gujarat, Haryana, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh.

The scheme represents a notable shift, moving away from the dominant supply-augmentation approach toward demand-side management and behavioural change. Funds are released to states based on performance against disbursement-linked indicators such as data disclosure, preparation of Water Security Plans at the Panchayat level, and measurable improvements in groundwater extraction patterns. An independent assessment by the Council on Energy, Environment and Water found that in pilot districts of Rajasthan, the trend of declining pre-monsoon groundwater levels had been reversed in some Gram Panchayats, indicating early positive signals where institutional strengthening was robust.

Other supporting initiatives 🔗

The wider ecosystem also includes the Namami Gange Programme for river rejuvenation, the Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayee Yojana with its “Per Drop More Crop” approach to irrigation efficiency, the National Water Mission under the National Action Plan on Climate Change, and the annual Jal Shakti Abhiyan: Catch the Rain campaign. Each addresses a slice of the larger puzzle, from pollution and conservation to women-led water security.

Implementation challenges 🔗

The volume of policy activity has not always translated into outcomes. Several structural problems continue to slow progress.

Funding gaps and execution delays 🔗

Even flagship missions face significant financial strain. The Ministry of Jal Shakti reportedly requested ₹2.79 lakh crore from the 16th Finance Commission to sustain and complete the Jal Jeevan Mission, but the interim panel approved roughly half of that amount, raising concerns about timely completion in slower-moving states like Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, and Rajasthan. Beyond initial capital costs, operation and maintenance funding remains a chronic gap, with pipes, pumps, and treatment systems aging without dedicated lifecycle budgets.

Functionality, not just infrastructure, is also a concern. Reporting based on the 79th round of the National Sample Survey suggests that while around 90 per cent of rural households have tap connections, only about 39 per cent use them as their primary water source. In several large states, that figure drops to between 6 and 30 per cent, exposing problems with water quality, pressure, irregular supply, and faulty plumbing that go beyond what installation numbers can capture.

Interstate water disputes 🔗

Few aspects of water governance are as politically charged as the sharing of inter-state rivers. The Cauvery dispute between Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Puducherry, the Krishna dispute among Maharashtra, Karnataka, Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, the Ravi-Beas dispute involving Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan, and the Mahanadi dispute between Odisha and Chhattisgarh have all stretched across decades.

The Inter-State River Water Disputes Act of 1956 provides for tribunals, but the process is notoriously slow. The Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal was constituted in 1990 and delivered its final award only in 2007, while the gazette notification followed years later. Delays at every stage, from tribunal formation to award notification, combined with frequent Supreme Court appeals despite Article 262’s restrictions, weaken enforcement and breed mistrust. The Inter-State River Water Disputes (Amendment) Bill, 2019, sought to address this by proposing a single permanent tribunal with strict timelines, but the broader political and data challenges remain.

Fragmented governance and weak basin planning 🔗

River systems are natural units, but governance follows political boundaries. Almost every National Water Policy has called for basin-level planning, yet no strong institutional mechanism has emerged to actually enforce it. Major rivers like the Ganga and Brahmaputra cross several states, but coordinated basin management remains aspirational. Each riparian state guards its constitutional jurisdiction, and central institutions are seen as advisory rather than authoritative.

Community participation and capacity 🔗

Newer schemes deliberately bet on people, not just pipelines. Atal Jal asks Gram Panchayats to prepare Water Security Plans, and Jal Jeevan Mission relies on VWSCs to plan, operate and maintain village water supply systems. The CEEW assessment in Rajasthan found that while awareness of scheme objectives among committees was high, their technical capacity to use monitoring instruments was low. Capacity building, hand-holding by support organisations, and continuous training are essential, but resource constraints often limit how deeply this happens.

Climate change and data gaps 🔗

Erratic monsoons, recurring droughts, glacial retreat, and rising urban demand are making historical water-sharing formulas less reliable. Compounding this is the absence of a uniform, transparent and mutually trusted national water data system. Disputing states often work with different numbers for the same river, which complicates both adjudication and planning.

The road ahead 🔗

The direction of reform is becoming clearer. A binding National Water Framework Law, reactivation of the NWRC, the establishment of river basin authorities, faster and time-bound dispute resolution, integrated data platforms, lifecycle budgeting for operation and maintenance, and serious investment in grassroots capacity all feature in expert recommendations. Schemes like Jal Jeevan Mission and Atal Bhujal Yojana have shown that ambitious targets can move the needle, but their lessons also point to where governance must mature, from counting taps to ensuring functional flow, from declaring policies to enforcing them, and from managing supply to managing demand.

What do you think? Should water be moved from the State List to the Concurrent List to enable stronger national coordination, or would that undermine federal balance? And how can village-level institutions like VWSCs be genuinely empowered, rather than treated as compliance checkboxes, to make community-led water governance a reality?

References

1. https://jalshakti.gov.in/
2. https://www.drishtiias.com/loksabha-rajyasabha-discussions/policy-watch-national-water-policy
3. https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/where-is-india-s-new-national-water-policy
4. https://jaljeevanmission.gov.in/
5. https://static.pib.gov.in/WriteReadData/specificdocs/documents/2024/oct/doc2024107410701.pdf
6. https://ataljal.mowr.gov.in/
7. https://www.impriindia.com/insights/groundwater-atal-bhujal-yojana-2020/
8. https://www.ceew.in/publications/atal-bhujal-yojana-scheme-for-sustainable-participatory-groundwater-resources-management
9. https://vajiramandravi.com/current-affairs/jal-jeevan-mission-2/
10. https://www.policycircle.org/policy/jal-jeevan-mission-credibility-crisis/
11. https://www.legacyias.com/about-the-krishna-water-dispute/
12. https://www.downtoearth.org.in/water/indias-national-water-policy-is-on-paper-without-power
13. https://www.indiawaterportal.org/governance-and-policy/governance/insights-atal-bhujal-yojana-rajasthan