VidBodh AcademyThe art and science of civil services preparation
Student login

Polity and Governance › Federalism

हिन्दी — Read in Hindi

Interstate relations, councils, border and water disputes

The States among themselves: the councils where they meet, their border and water disputes, and the reorganisation of States under Articles 3 and 4.

Showing 5 of 9 articles, those that changed from 1 July to 30 September 2026.Show all

Sardar Sarovar cost sharing settlement

Copy link to Sardar Sarovar cost sharing settlement

Prelims

The Sardar Sarovar Project on the Narmada is shared by Gujarat, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan under the award of the Narmada tribunal.

What changed

  1. 7 Jul 2026Briefnewly addedOn 7 July the Chief Ministers of the four States signed an agreement in New Delhi settling long pending cost sharing disputes over the project. The disputes were closed through a one time settlement of outstanding dues, in the presence of the Union Home and Jal Shakti Ministers. It shows a negotiated settlement working alongside the tribunal's award. Free Press Journal, 7 Jul 2026: Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Gujarat sign Sardar Sarovar pact (opens in a new tab)

Kerala becomes Keralam

Copy link to Kerala becomes Keralam

Prelims and Mains

LeadKerala becomes Keralam: how a State's name is changedAugust 2026

Why in news

From 25 August 2026 the State of Kerala is officially Keralam. Parliament passed the Kerala (Alteration of Name) Act, 2026 under Article 3, and the President gave assent on 14 August.

Background

  • The State is called Keralam in Malayalam. The Kerala Assembly passed resolutions asking for the change in 2023 and again in June 2024.
  • The First Schedule of the Constitution lists the States by name, so the name can be changed only by Parliament.
  • Article 3 lets Parliament form new States and alter the area, boundaries or name of any State.

The procedure under Articles 3 and 4

  • The Bill can be introduced only on the recommendation of the President.
  • The President must first refer the Bill to the legislature of the State concerned, for its views within a set time.
  • The views of the State do not bind Parliament.
  • The Bill is passed by a simple majority, like an ordinary law.
  • Article 4 says such a law is not an amendment of the Constitution under Article 368, even though it changes the First and Fourth Schedules.

What the Act does

  • It substitutes "Keralam" for "Kerala" in the First Schedule (the States) and the Fourth Schedule (seats in the Rajya Sabha), and in Articles 31A and 290A.
  • It gives the government one year to adapt existing laws.

What this tells us about Indian federalism

  • India is an "indestructible Union of destructible States": Parliament can redraw or rename a State without its consent.
  • This is unlike the United States, where a State's territory cannot be altered without its agreement.
  • In practice the Union has acted on names only when the State asked. Here the request came from the Assembly, twice.
  • The reverse case shows the Union's hold: West Bengal's request to be named Bangla has been pending for years.
  • The same Article 3 was used in 2019 to reorganise Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories.

Cases to cite

  • Babulal Parate v. State of Bombay (1960): Parliament is not bound by the views of the State legislature; the Bill need not be referred again if amended.
  • In re Berubari Union (1960): Article 3 does not cover ceding Indian territory to a foreign State; that needs a constitutional amendment.
  • In re Article 370 of the Constitution (2023): upheld the creation of the Union Territory of Ladakh; left open whether a State can be turned wholly into a Union Territory.

The way forward

  • Keep the convention that a name changes only on the State's request.
  • Decide such requests within a set time, so that a pending request does not become a point of friction.

Prelims facts

  • A State's name is changed by Parliament under Article 3, by simple majority.
  • The President's prior recommendation and reference to the State legislature are required; the State's views are not binding.
  • Under Article 4 such a law is not a constitutional amendment.
  • Earlier changes: Madras to Tamil Nadu (1969), Mysore to Karnataka (1973), Uttaranchal to Uttarakhand (2007), Orissa to Odisha (2011).
  • Changing the name of a city needs no law of Parliament.

Open the lead on its own page

The State is called Keralam in Malayalam. The Kerala Assembly passed resolutions asking for the change in 2023 and again in June 2024.

What changed

  1. 25 Aug 2026LeadKerala becomes Keralam: how a State's name is changed

Mahanadi water dispute

Copy link to Mahanadi water dispute

Prelims and Mains

The Mahanadi dispute between Chhattisgarh and Odisha went to a tribunal set up in 2018 under the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956, and the States may instead settle it by negotiation.

What changed

  1. 30 Jul 2026BriefChhattisgarh and Odisha agreed to seek a negotiated settlement through a technical committee chaired by the Chairman of the Central Water Commission. PIB, 30 Jul 2026: UNION MINISTER OF JAL SHAKTI CHAIRS MEETING WITH CHIEF MINISTERS OF CHHATTISGARH AND ODISHA TO FACILITATE AN AMICABLE SETTLEMENT OF THE MAHANADI WATER DISPUTE (opens in a new tab)

The Sone agreement

Copy link to The Sone agreement

Prelims and Mains

The Sone agreement divides the water of the Sone, a right bank tributary that rises near Amarkantak in Madhya Pradesh and joins the Ganga near Patna.

  • Its water was first divided under the Bansagar Agreement of 1973 between Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and undivided Bihar.

Two routes to settle a river

  • Article 262 of the Constitution lets Parliament provide by law for deciding disputes over interstate river waters, and keep the courts out of them.
  • The Inter State River Water Disputes Act, 1956 is that law, under which the Centre constitutes a tribunal when a State asks.
  • The other route is a negotiated agreement, which binds the States without any tribunal at all.
  • Which route they take decides how long the water stays unshared.

What changed

  1. 1 Sep 2026

    • Bihar and Jharkhand signed a memorandum of understanding dividing the Sone's water, ending a dispute open since Jharkhand was carved out in 2000.
    • Bihar takes 5.75 million acre feet and Jharkhand 2, from the 7.75 that undivided Bihar held under the Bansagar Agreement.

    The Indian Express, 1 Sep 2026: How Bihar and Jharkhand resolved their 25-year Sone water dispute (opens in a new tab)

Cauvery and Mekedatu

Copy link to Cauvery and Mekedatu

Prelims and Mains

The Cauvery Water Management Authority implements the sharing of the river between Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Puducherry as fixed by the tribunal and modified by the Supreme Court in 2018.

  • Mekedatu is a dam Karnataka proposes on the river inside its own territory.

Appraisal in the Cauvery basin

  1. State report

    The State submits a preliminary report

  2. CWC scrutiny

    The Central Water Commission checks hydrology and inter State aspects

  3. Project report

    Preparation of the detailed project report is approved

  4. Technical note

    The CWC sends a technical note to the Cauvery Water Management Authority

  5. Authority's view

    The authority gives its view, or is presumed to concur after six months

  6. Other clearances

    Environmental and tribal clearances follow

Tamil Nadu's objection is to the fifth step, where the authority's silence now counts as agreement.Source: The Hindu, 26 June 2026

What changed

  1. 30 Jul 2026

    • The Cauvery Water Management Authority upheld a direction that Karnataka release 3,500 cusecs a day to Tamil Nadu.
    • On Mekedatu the Centre told Parliament that the 2018 Supreme Court judgment does not require Karnataka to obtain other States' permission.
    • But any revised project report needs appraisal by the Central Water Commission and the Authority's views.

    Mains: Karnataka often meets the annual quantity but not the monthly schedule, so compliance figures and distress can both be true.

    Frontline, 2 Aug 2026: The Cauvery Water Management Authority upheld a direction to release 3,500 cusecs daily to Tamil Nadu, and the Mekedatu project has reopened the question of whether a riparian State needs its neighbours' consent. (opens in a new tab)

Show history (1 other update)

  1. 25 Jun 2026

    • The Tamil Nadu Assembly on 19 June unanimously opposed Mekedatu and sought a tribunal.
    • The Supreme Court had dismissed Tamil Nadu's review of a November 2025 decision calling its challenge premature.
    • Karnataka is preparing a revised project report.
    • Tamil Nadu also opposes new Central Water Commission (CWC) guidelines whose presumptive concurrence clause treats the authority as agreeing if it gives no view within six months.

    Mains: The dispute is driven by a trust deficit between the riparian States rather than the project's stated drinking water purpose.

    The Hindu, 25 Jun 2026: Furore over the Mekedatu project (opens in a new tab) · The Hindu, 26 Jun 2026: Why is Tamil Nadu opposing the Centre's latest guidelines on Cauvery basin? | Explained (opens in a new tab)

Download a copy

Every article on this page, in full.