In a significant development, the Supreme Court has once again waded into the contentious waters of the decades-long Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) canal dispute between the neighbouring states of Punjab and Haryana. The long-standing water-sharing feud between the two northern states has been a cause of concern for decades, and the Supreme Court's recent order to carry out a survey of the land earmarked for the canal's construction in Punjab has only deepened the crisis.
The country’s Apex Court, in a development that has rekindled the longstanding controversy, issued a stern warning to the Punjab Government, also expressing its dissatisfaction with the state's progress on the controversial project.
The issue of SYL canal, intended to link the Sutlej and Yamuna rivers, was also reverberated during the recent North Zonal Council meeting, presided over by the Union Home Minister Amit Shah at Amritsar on September 27.
Haryana Chief Minister Manohar Lal Khattar had called for “urgent completion” of SYL canal’s construction in Punjab region, claiming that surplus water from Ravi, Sutlej and Beas rivers was currently flowing into Pakistan and constructing the canal would enable its productive utilization. His Punjab counterpart Bhagwant Mann, on the other hand, reiterated that Punjab had no water to share with any other state and the SYL project should now be conceived as the Yamuna Sutlej Link (YSL). “The Sutlej has already dried up and the need of the hour is to draw water from the Ganga and the Yamuna to Punjab through the Sutlej channel. Yamuna waters is the only solution of the water dispute,” he stressed.
The SYL canal project is rooted in the history of water-sharing agreements between Punjab and Haryana, dating back to 1981. When Haryana was carved out of Punjab in 1966, it was decided that for the effective allocation of water, the SYL canal would be constructed. Both states were tasked with building their portions of the canal within their territories.
Haryana completed its segment of the canal as per the agreement. However, Punjab, after an initial phase, halted the construction, setting the stage for multiple legal battles. In 2002, the Supreme Court decreed in favour of Haryana's suit, ordering Punjab to honour its commitments on water-sharing.
In response, Punjab passed the Punjab Termination of Agreement Act in 2004, terminating the 1981 agreement and other related pacts. The move led to the Supreme Court's rebuke in 2016, with the Court striking down Punjab's law and declaring it unconstitutional. Punjab then returned the land earmarked for the canal to the landowners.
However, the SYL canal dispute didn't end there. The Centre, while acknowledging the failure of talks between the two states, expressed concern that the construction of the canal could lead to law and order problems in Punjab. The matter remained unresolved, and Punjab insisted that it couldn't provide additional water to other states due to the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act of 2004, which set strict limits on water-sharing.
Supreme Court's Stern Warning and New Order
The recent developments in the SYL canal dispute revolve around the Supreme Court's reprimand of the Punjab government for its failure to construct its side of the canal, in line with the 21-year-old directive. The court warned the ruling Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) to comply with its orders or face further action.
A bench led by Justice SK Kaul emphasized that the Punjab government should respect the maryada (decorum) of the Supreme Court and avoid forcing the Court to issue stricter orders. The Centre was directed to oversee pre-construction land surveys and the matter was scheduled for review in January.
The Court expressed concern over the lack of progress in constructing the canal in Punjab, emphasizing the need to estimate the extent of required construction.
Political Unity Amidst Crisis
One of the most remarkable aspects of this latest development in the SYL canal dispute is the rare show of unity among all political parties in Punjab. In an unusual turn of events, the opposition parties have backed the AAP government's stance that Punjab cannot spare any additional water for other states.
Congress leader Amrinder Singh Raja Warring said that Punjab respects the Supreme Court but emphasized that the state has no surplus water to provide. He called for the AAP government to present its case effectively in the Court. Punjab BJP president Sunil Jakhar, echoed the same sentiment, reiterating that Punjab does not have any water to share.
AAP government also underscored this point, emphasizing that it lacks the resources to provide additional water to other states. They suggested that a tribunal should reassess water availability in Punjab, highlighting that the situation had changed significantly in the last 70 years.
As the legal and political battles continue, the fate of the SYL canal project remains uncertain. The Supreme Court's stern warning raises concerns over the canal's construction, especially given the complex history and deeply entrenched positions of both states.
Constitute a tribunal on SYL, conduct in-depth study related to water: AAP
AAP said that the Punjab government’s stand on SYL is very clear and the State is not in a position to give even a single drop of additional water to other states.
“The water situation in Punjab is no longer the same as it was 50 years ago. Today, Punjab itself is struggling with water issues,” said AAP Punjab chief spokesperson Malvinder Singh Kang.
Kang, on behalf of the party, demanded that a tribunal be constituted to know the situation of water in SYL and Punjab, and it should conduct an in-depth study on the matter as to whether Punjab is in a position to provide water to other states in the present circumstances or not.
He pointed that the land which was notified for SYL has now also been denotified, and now notifying it again will create many problems. “So now it is not possible to make SYL because we neither have extra water nor the required land. We will put this matter before the Court in a legal manner and will also raise it before the Central Government,” he added.
Cong Warns Against Forcing Punjab Back into the Black Days
Punjab Congress president Amrinder Singh Raja Warring strongly criticized the Supreme Court's order to conduct a survey in Punjab regarding the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) canal's construction land, while emphasizing that Punjab lacks surplus water to share with other states, making the survey unnecessary. He accused the ruling AAP of weakening Punjab's case, alleging that AAP leaders have a vested interest in the issue.
Warring cautioned against playing with the emotions of Punjabis, as the SYL issue has historically led to disputes and worsened situations in the state. He warned that escalating the matter could push Punjab back to its troubled past, stressing that Punjab has no water to spare for the canal construction.
SAD condemns AAP Govt for expressing its willingness to construct SYL
SAD condemned the AAP Government for expressing its willingness in the Supreme Court to construct the SYL canal but for pressure from opposition parties as well as difficulties in acquiring land for the canal which had been returned back to farmers by the erstwhile SAD Government, led by Parkash Singh Badal.
Terming this contention in the Apex Court as tantamount to backstabbing farmers, senior SAD leader Bikram Singh Majithia said: “We proudly oppose the construction of the SYL canal which will be only constructed over our dead bodies. We challenge the AAP government to relay this to the Supreme Court. Punjabis and the SAD will never let the grand conspiracy of AAP Convener Arvind Kejriwal to hand over the State’s river waters to Haryana to succeed at any cost.”
He stated that Punjab’s counsel blamed opposition parties as well as problems in acquiring land from farmers as the reasons for delay in construction of the SYL.
