RULES AND REGULATIONS- 1955 STATE’S CONSTITUTIONAL ROLE IN ENFORCING THE RIGHT TO WATER

This Article is written by Akhi Akter Nishi, University of Information Technology and Sciences (UITS), an intern under Legal Vidhiya.

ABSTRACT

Access to clean and safe water is not just a basic need, but also a pillar of human dignity and growth. In India, where water scarcity is intensifying due to climate change, population growth, and infrastructural limitations, the question of who bears responsibility for ensuring equitable water access is both urgent and complex. This paper critically examines the State’s constitutional and legislative responsibilities in safeguarding the right to water, focusing particularly on the Rules and Regulations of 1955. While the Indian Constitution does not explicitly recognize water as a fundamental right, judicial interpretations of Article 21 have increasingly framed it as integral to the right to life. This study explores how constitutional provisions, judicial interventions, and international human rights standards intersect to define the State’s role. Highlighting gaps in current regulations and policy implementation, it offers pragmatic recommendations to strengthen institutional accountability and legal guarantees for inclusive and sustainable water governance. This analysis aims to contribute meaningfully to ongoing discussions about environmental justice and human rights in India.

KEYWORDS

Right to Water, State Obligation, Indian Constitution, Rules and Regulations 1955, Water Governance, Environmental Law, Judicial Interpretation.

INTRODUCTION

Water is not only necessary for survival, but it is also linked to public health, economic prosperity, and personal dignity. Globally recognized as a human right (OHCHR, 2010), access to safe and sufficient water remains a persistent challenge in India. Despite its critical significance, the Indian Constitution does not explicitly guarantee the right to water as a fundamental entitlement. However, the Supreme Court has progressively interpreted Article 21—the right to life—as encompassing the right to clean and safe drinking water. 

In a country where millions still face daily struggles for adequate water, the responsibility of the State becomes central. Given that water is listed as a State subject under the Constitution, State governments play a crucial role in managing, regulating, and distributing water resources. Early legislative instruments like the Rules and Regulations of 1955 attempted to formalize water governance frameworks. However, modern challenges such as rapid urbanization, industrial pollution, and climate-induced water stress demand more robust and adaptable regulatory mechanisms.

This paper examines the constitutional and legislative obligations of State governments in securing the right to water, contextualizing the 1955 Rules within broader judicial interpretations and international human rights standards. By analyzing regulatory gaps and institutional challenges, this study aims to offer practical recommendations for more inclusive, equitable, and sustainable water governance in India.

THE CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK AND JUDICIAL RECOGNITION OF THE RIGHT TO WATER

The Indian Constitution does not explicitly mention water as a fundamental right. However, it allows for the legal recognition of water through judicial interpretation. Personal liberty and the right to life are protected by Article 21. Access to water, which is essential for life and human dignity, has been regarded by courts as part of this right. In the important case of Pashchim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samity v State of West Bengal, the Supreme Court acknowledged the State’s duty to provide basic necessities, including clean drinking water, under Article 21.

Furthermore, the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) in Articles 39(b) and 47 emphasize the State’s role in ensuring that resources, such as water, are shared for the common good and to enhance public health.

RULES AND REGULATIONS, 1955: HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE AND CURRENT RELEVANCE

The Rules and Regulations of 1955 were designed to manage the public supply of water, especially in urban and peri-urban areas. These regulations provided procedural mechanisms for water allocation, system maintenance, consumer rights, and dispute resolution. While innovative for their time, these regulations have not kept pace with contemporary socio-environmental challenges such as groundwater depletion, pollution, and climate change-induced scarcity (Cullet, 2006).

A critical shortcoming of the 1955 framework is its limited applicability to rural areas and inadequate provisions addressing environmental sustainability. Cullet (2007) argues that many existing water regulations, including the 1955 Rules, lack explicit safeguards for groundwater protection and sustainable resource management.

ROLE OF THE STATE GOVERNMENTS IN WATER GOVERNANCE

According to Entry 17 of List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution, water is essentially a State matter, hence state governments are principally in charge of managing it. However, interstate water issues and fragmented governance have hampered the development of comprehensive national water policies. Further, the overlap between Central and State authorities, given Entry 56 of List I concerning interstate rivers, often results in jurisdictional conflicts. Institutional inefficiencies and the absence of dedicated regulatory authorities in many States exacerbate these issues, limiting effective water governance.

JUDICIAL DOCTRINES AND ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS

Indian courts have progressively developed doctrines like the Public Trust Doctrine, wherein the State holds natural resources, including water, in trust for public use. In Narmada Bachao Andolan v Union of India (2000) 10 SCC 664, the Supreme Court emphasized that equitable access to water must be harmonized with sustainable development principles.

However, the judiciary’s interventionist role, pivotal in shaping legal discourse, is not a substitute for proactive statutory regulation and State action.

INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS PERSPECTIVE

India’s obligations under international law highlight the need for strong water governance. The UN Committee on Financial, societal and Cultural Rights’ General Comment No. 15 outlines India’s increasing realization of the right to water as a signatory to the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).

Comparative constitutional frameworks, like South Africa’s, explicitly state the right to water. These examples provide useful models for India to consider when formalizing the right within its constitutional framework.

CHALLENGES AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

• Fragmented Legal Framework: Water governance in India is characterized by overlapping regulations and conflicting jurisdictional mandates.
• Inadequate Infrastructure: Outdated infrastructure impedes efficient water distribution, particularly in rural and marginalized communities.
• Lack of a National Water Framework Law: The absence of a single national legislative framework hinders cooperation and accountability.
• Overreliance on Judiciary: Courts have filled legislative and policy voids, but sustainable change requires proactive governance.

RECOMMENDATIONS

• Enactment of a comprehensive National Water Framework Law to harmonize State and Central regulatory efforts.
• Revising the 1955 Rules and Regulations to include provisions for environmental sustainability, rural inclusion, and groundwater protection.
• Establishment of independent State-level regulatory bodies to oversee water management and enforce compliance.
• Promotion of participatory governance models involving local communities and marginalized groups.

USE OF AUTHORITIES

A. JUDICIAL DECISIONS:

• Subhash Kumar v State of Bihar AIR 1991 SC 420: Acknowledged the entitlement to pollution-free water as an integral component of the right to life under Article 21.
• Pashchim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samity v State of West Bengal AIR 1996 SC 2426: Affirmed the State’s duty to provide clean drinking water within the broader right to life.
• Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v Union of India AIR 1996 SC 1446: Applied the Public Trust Doctrine to natural resources like water.
• Narmada Bachao Andolan v Union of India (2000) 10 SCC 664: Highlighted sustainable development and equitable water distribution principles.

B. STATUTORY AND CONSTITUTIONAL INSTRUMENTS:

• The Constitution of India, 1950: Article 21, Articles 39(b) and 47 of Directive Principles of State Policy, Entry 17 List II, Entry 56 List I.
• Rules and Regulations, 1955: Provided an early regulatory framework for public water supply management.

C. INTERNATIONAL LEGAL INSTRUMENTS:

• International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) 1966: India’s ratification reinforces obligations towards progressive realization of the right to water.
• General Comment No. 15 of UN CESCR (2002): Explicitly recognizes water as a human right essential for the realization of all other human rights.
• OHCHR Fact Sheet No. 35 (2010): Provides guidance on States’ obligations towards the right to water.

D, ACADEMIC AND POLICY LITERATURE:

• Cullet, P. (2006) ‘Water Law Reforms in India: Trends and Prospects’, IELRC Working Paper 2006-01.
• Cullet, P. (2007) ‘Water Law in India: Examination of Current Framework and Suggested Reforms, IELRC Working Paper 2007-01.
• Narain, S. (2006) ‘Securing the Right to Water’, Economic and Political Weekly, 41(7).
• Dhawan, V. (2022) ‘The Evolution of the Right to Water in India’, ResearchGate.

E. COMPARATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW:

• Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996: Section 27 explicitly enshrines the right to water.

These authorities collectively provide a comprehensive legal and theoretical foundation for analyzing the State’s role in enforcing the right to water in India, enabling critical assessment of current frameworks and potential reforms.

CONCLUSION

The right to water is not only a legal entitlement but also a vital humanitarian need that supports health, dignity, and development. In India, the recognition of this right under Article 21 has addressed gaps in the constitution, but actual implementation is still lacking. The Rules and Regulations of 1955, while groundbreaking at the time, are now outdated and unable to tackle today’s water governance challenges, including climate-related scarcity, differences between urban and rural areas, and industrial pollution.

This study shows that although State governments are responsible for ensuring access to water, issues like fragmentation, lack of infrastructure, and slow regulation still block fair water distribution. International human rights obligations also push India to view access to water as a legally enforceable right instead of just a policy goal.

Going forward, India needs to make significant changes. It should update old regulations, create a national water framework law, decentralize governance, and improve enforcement. Accountability within institutions and involvement from communities should be the foundation of future water governance. Only by aligning constitutional principles, judicial orders, and human rights standards can the State turn the right to water from a theoretical promise into a reality for all its citizens. Ensuring water justice is both a legal duty and a moral responsibility in the quest for fair and sustainable development.

REFERENCES

1. Cullet, P. (2006) ‘Water Law Reforms in India: Trends and Prospects’, International Environmental Law Research Centre (IELRC) Working Paper 2006-01. Available at: https://www.ielrc.org/content/a0604.pdf (Accessed: 16 July 2025).
2. Cullet, P. (2007) ‘Water Law in India: Overview of Existing Framework and Proposed Reforms’, International Environmental Law Research Centre (IELRC) Working Paper 2007-01. Available at: https://www.ielrc.org/content/w0701.pdf (Accessed: 16 July 2025).
3. Dhawan, V. (2022) ‘The Evolution of the Right to Water in India’, ResearchGate. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/358209949_The_Evolution_of_the_Right_to_Water_in_India (Accessed: 16 July 2025).
4. Narain, S. (2006) ‘Securing the Right to Water’, Economic and Political Weekly, 41(7), pp. 613-614.
5. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) (2010) The Right to Water: Fact Sheet No. 35. Available at: https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Publications/FactSheet35en.pdf (Accessed: 16 July 2025).
6. United Nations (2002) General Comment No. 15: The Right to Water (Arts. 11 and 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights). Available at: https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/general-comments-and-recommendations/general-comment-no-15-right-water-arts-11-and-12 (Accessed: 16 July 2025).
7. Subhash Kumar v State of Bihar AIR 1991 SC 420.
8. Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v Union of India AIR 1996 SC 1446.
9. Pashchim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samity v State of West Bengal AIR 1996 SC 2426.
10. Narmada Bachao Andolan v Union of India (2000) 10 SCC 664.
11. Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996
12. The Constitution of India (1950).

Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is personal.