Question Q4Assess the effectiveness and describe the potential impact of delaysGS2GS2
Assess the effectiveness of Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956 in resolution of river-water disputes. Also describe the potential impact of delays in resolution of water disputes.
Introduction
Inter-State River Water Disputes Act 1956 outlines procedure and appoints tribunal to resolve inter-state river water disputes.
17 words
Main Body
Examples: Mahadaji Tribunal, Cauvery Tribunal
Analysis of Effectiveness:
Pros:
Resolution by Dialogue and conversation
Present debate in political environment
Resolution outside sect of judiciary without delay
Cons:
O&M tribunals have delivered awards
Time of decades to decide the award
Issues Studies not honouring the award of tribunal
Impact of delays in settlement:
1Livelihood: Drinking water to riparian states in parted.
2Politicization: Used by political leaders to draw votes during elections without evidence.
3Eroded of Trust: Trust in dispute attorney architective reduces which leads to destructive culture.
4Economic: Federal Disputes and Economic Blockade also delta Investment in region.
5Regionalism: Extend regional sentiment in the population - clashes riots etc.
State Tribunal:
Upset time bound
Compulsory hearing of award
Use Either Additive to schedule disputes
— ADITYA HRIDAY UPADHYAY
134 words10 paragraphs6 bullet points
Conclusion
State Tribunal with upset time bound, compulsory hearing of award, and use of either additive mechanism to schedule disputes
19 words
- Clear pros-cons analysis format
- Specific examples with tribunal names
- Addresses both effectiveness and delay issues
Steal this copy's techniques PremiumAI pulls out the reusable moves — pick the ones you want as flashcards
Topper
ADITYA HRIDAY UPADHYAY
Subject & Paper
GS2GS2
Topic
Federal Structure and Centre-State Relations
Inter-State Water Disputes
Inter-State River Water Disputes Act 1956 and Tribunal Mechanism
Writing Stats
170
Total words
10
Paragraphs
6
Bullets
Analytical with pros-cons structure
Tone