The long-standing border dispute between Karnataka and Maharashtra has once again taken center stage, with the Maharashtra government recently reconstituting a high-powered committee aimed at resolving the contentious issue. Headed by Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis, the 18-member committee includes prominent political leaders and legislators from across party lines, reflecting the gravity and complexity of the dispute that has simmered since the States Reorganisation Act of 1956. As tensions flare and political rhetoric escalates, the border issue threatens to disrupt regional harmony and impact millions residing in the disputed areas.

The Karnataka-Maharashtra border dispute is one of independent India’s most enduring and emotionally charged territorial conflicts. At its heart lies the question of linguistic identity and the legacy of the States Reorganisation Act of 1956, which redrew state boundaries largely along linguistic lines. The city of Belagavi (formerly Belgaum) and its adjoining areas became the epicenter of this dispute, with both Maharashtra and Karnataka laying claim to the region based on language, culture, and historical administration.

The roots of the conflict can be traced back to the early 1950s, when the States Reorganisation Commission recommended that Belagavi and several surrounding villages remain with the then Mysore state (now Karnataka), despite their sizable Marathi-speaking populations. Maharashtra, formed in 1960, has since argued that these areas, including Belagavi, Nipani, Karwar, and over 800 villages, should have been merged with it due to their cultural and linguistic affinity with Marathi-speaking people.

Karnataka, however, has consistently maintained that the current boundaries are legitimate and final, as established by the States Reorganisation Act and later reaffirmed by the Mahajan Commission in 1967. The Mahajan Commission, set up by the central government to resolve the dispute, recommended that most of the disputed areas, including Belagavi, remain with Karnataka, with only a handful of villages to be transferred to Maharashtra. Maharashtra rejected the commission’s findings, and the dispute has since remained unresolved.

The issue has repeatedly flared up in both states, often coinciding with elections or major political developments. Political parties in Maharashtra have used the dispute to rally support among Marathi-speaking voters, while those in Karnataka have done the same with Kannada speakers. The dispute has thus become a potent symbol of regional pride and identity, fueling linguistic and cultural assertions on both sides of the border.

The High-Powered Committee: Maharashtra’s Renewed Push for Resolution

On June 19, 2025, Maharashtra issued a government resolution to reconstitute the committee tasked with addressing the border dispute with Karnataka. The committee, chaired by CM Devendra Fadnavis, comprises deputy chief ministers Eknath Shinde and Ajit Pawar, former chief ministers Narayan Rane, Sharad Pawar, and Prithviraj Chavan, along with several ministers and legislators. This reconstitution follows the formation of the new Maharashtra government after last year’s assembly elections and signals a renewed political commitment to resolving the decades-old conflict. The committee’s mandate is to build consensus and take crucial decisions regarding the disputed territories, which include over 800 villages claimed by Maharashtra but currently administered by Karnataka.

In Belagavi and the disputed villages, the impact of the conflict is deeply felt. Residents often find themselves caught between two administrative systems, with both states offering competing welfare schemes, educational benefits, and cultural programs. This has led to confusion, divided loyalties, and at times, social unrest. The annual winter session of the Karnataka legislature in Belagavi is often marked by heightened security and protests from pro-Maharashtra groups.

The legal battle over the border has dragged on for decades, with Maharashtra filing a petition in the Supreme Court in 2004 seeking the transfer of Belagavi and other Marathi-majority areas. Karnataka has vigorously contested the petition, arguing that the boundaries are constitutionally settled and that the issue should not be reopened. The Supreme Court has yet to deliver a final verdict, and periodic hearings keep the issue alive in the national consciousness.

Efforts at political resolution have included the formation of various committees and negotiation panels. The latest reconstitution of Maharashtra’s high-powered committee under Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis is seen as a renewed attempt to bring political heft and consensus to the negotiating table. The inclusion of senior leaders from across the political spectrum underscores the seriousness with which Maharashtra views the issue.

Historical Roots and Lingering Contentions

The Maharashtra-Karnataka border dispute dates back to the linguistic reorganization of states in 1956. Maharashtra claims the Belagavi (Belgaum) district and 814 surrounding villages, citing their significant Marathi-speaking populations and historical ties to the erstwhile Bombay Presidency.

Karnataka, on the other hand, asserts the legitimacy of the current boundaries based on the States Reorganisation Act and the 1967 Mahajan Commission report, which largely upheld Karnataka’s territorial claims. Over the decades, the dispute has led to frequent protests, political confrontations, and legal battles, including ongoing cases before the Supreme Court of India.

However, the absence of key opposition members in the committee has drawn criticism, with some arguing that a truly representative panel is essential for building lasting consensus. The committee’s mandate includes not only legal and political advocacy but also the coordination of welfare measures for Marathi-speaking people in the disputed areas, reflecting the multifaceted nature of the dispute.

On the ground, language continues to be a flashpoint. Pro-Maharashtra groups in Belagavi and elsewhere have campaigned for the use of Marathi in official signage, schools, and public offices, sometimes clashing with pro-Kannada activists. The Karnataka government, meanwhile, has promoted Kannada language and culture in the region, creating parallel institutions and festivals to reinforce its administrative control.

The dispute has also had economic implications. Belagavi, a major commercial and industrial hub, has at times seen investment and development projects delayed or complicated due to uncertainty over its administrative status. Businesses and investors have occasionally expressed concern about the long-term stability of the region, though the city continues to thrive as a key center for trade, education, and manufacturing.

Political and Social Ramifications in the Disputed Regions

The border dispute has profound implications for the residents of the affected areas. Marathi-speaking populations in Karnataka’s Belagavi and adjoining districts have long demanded inclusion in Maharashtra, citing cultural and linguistic affinity. Maharashtra has responded by announcing various welfare schemes and concessions for Marathi speakers residing in these regions, including educational and employment benefits. Conversely, Karnataka maintains administrative control and continues to assert its sovereignty, leading to periodic unrest and strained inter-state relations. The dispute also influences electoral politics, with political parties leveraging the issue to consolidate regional vote banks.

For ordinary residents, the dispute is both a source of anxiety and a part of daily life. Many families have roots on both sides of the border, and cross-border marriages, trade, and cultural exchange are common. Yet, periodic flare-ups—such as protests, bandh calls, or clashes—can disrupt lives and livelihoods, underscoring the human cost of the unresolved conflict.

Education is another area where the border dispute has had an impact. Both states have set up schools and colleges in the disputed areas, offering instruction in their respective languages and curricula. This has sometimes led to duplication of resources and confusion among students and parents about which state’s certificates and qualifications will be recognized.

The media in both states play a significant role in shaping public opinion on the border issue. Regional newspapers, television channels, and social media platforms often amplify nationalist rhetoric, sometimes escalating tensions. Editorials and opinion pieces frequently call for a “just solution,” but what constitutes justice is hotly debated.

Central government intervention has been sporadic and largely limited to appeals for peace and dialogue. Successive Union governments have been reluctant to take a firm stand, wary of alienating voters in either state. The central government’s role has mostly been to facilitate talks, appoint commissions, and urge both states to maintain law and order.

The Road Ahead: Challenges and Prospects for Peaceful Resolution

Despite multiple commissions, committees, and judicial interventions, the Maharashtra-Karnataka border dispute remains unresolved. The reconstitution of the high-powered committee under CM Fadnavis represents a strategic attempt to break the deadlock through political dialogue and consensus-building. However, the absence of key opposition members and the entrenched positions of both states pose significant hurdles.

The committee’s success will depend on its ability to balance legal, cultural, and political considerations while fostering goodwill among stakeholders. As the committee prepares to meet and deliberate, the nation watches closely, hopeful for a peaceful and lasting resolution.

The dispute also has a parliamentary dimension, with MPs from both states raising the issue in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. Parliamentary debates are often heated, with members trading accusations and demanding central intervention. However, concrete legislative action has been elusive, and the issue remains largely within the purview of state governments and the judiciary.

In recent years, there have been calls for a more pragmatic approach to the dispute, with suggestions ranging from joint administration of the disputed areas to greater autonomy for local self-governments. Some civil society groups advocate for a people-centric solution that prioritizes development, welfare, and cultural coexistence over territorial claims.

Despite the political and legal stalemate, there have been instances of cross-border cooperation. Festivals, trade fairs, and cultural exchanges continue to take place, albeit sometimes under the shadow of protest. These events highlight the interconnectedness of the region and the potential for peaceful coexistence if the political will exists.

The reconstitution of Maharashtra’s high-powered committee in June 2025 has reignited hopes—and fears—about the future trajectory of the dispute. While some see it as a positive step toward resolution, others worry that it may lead to renewed confrontation, especially if political leaders use the issue to score points ahead of upcoming elections.

Follow: Karnataka Government

Also Read: 10 Startling Facts: Karnataka’s Housing Crisis Deepens Amid Policy Gaps, Fiscal Woes, and Soaring Demand