Panaji Officials Plan Supreme Court Move Amid Renewed Mhadei River Water Concerns
The Goa government is preparing to approach the Supreme Court, alleging that Karnataka has begun unauthorised diversion of water from the Mhadei river’s Kalasa tributary. Officials in Panaji stated the state is left with no alternative but to seek legal remedy, after reports surfaced of preparatory work in Karnataka forests—raising alarms about deforestation and redirection of river flows. The dispute has reignited long-standing tensions among the three riparian states: Goa, Karnataka, and Maharashtra, with environmental and legal stakes at their highest yet.
According to authorities, Karnataka has been engaging in various activities within its jurisdiction, allegedly without the required clearances from the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests. Goa’s leadership claims these actions not only threaten the ecological balance of the Western Ghats but also infringe upon river-sharing agreements. Legal experts believe that if diversion work proceeds unchecked, it could weaken Goa’s standing in the ongoing Supreme Court case regarding water-sharing and contempt of court petitions filed earlier by the state. Opposition voices in Goa’s legislative assembly criticised the administration’s handling of the issue, accusing it of spending large sums on legal consultations and court proceedings without achieving any measurable outcomes. Citing figures running into several crores, they argued that while the state exchequer bears the legal expenses, Karnataka is advancing on the ground.
There is particular concern that forest land has been marked for tree cutting and water pipeline routes—actions interpreted as preparatory steps for water diversion. Legislators demanded urgent intervention and full transparency on the status of the legal battle. Activists and environmental scientists warn that tampering with the Mhadei river system could have far-reaching consequences. The river plays a crucial ecological and cultural role in Goa, supporting biodiversity, agriculture, and water supply across several talukas. Altering its flow risks long-term damage to fragile forest ecosystems and reduces freshwater availability for downstream communities. Some experts have called for an independent environmental assessment, arguing that hydrological decisions made without scientific backing can result in irreversible harm, especially in the age of climate volatility.
While officials maintain that the legal course remains the most viable path forward, concerns persist about the efficacy of litigation without parallel diplomatic and ecological negotiations. Goa’s case underscores the larger national challenge of balancing development ambitions with water justice, ecological preservation, and interstate equity. With the matter sub judice, all eyes are on how India’s top court will respond to this intensifying river dispute, and whether sustainable water governance can emerge from a legacy of legal wrangling.
