Apex Court verdict on SYL Canal creates piquant situation for Cong, BJP

With elections round the corner in Punjab, the Supreme Court (SC) verdict on the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) Canal water-sharing agreement sparked a political blame game in the state, as well as a piquant situation for national parties like the Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

Immediately after the verdict, which quashed the 2004 Punjab Act passed during the Congress government terminating all water agreements with the neighbouring states, Punjab Congress President Amarinder Singh resigned from his Lok Sabha seat while his party MLAs resigned en masse from the State Assembly.

But Chief Spokesman of his Party, Randeep Singh Surjiwala, hailed the verdict, showing the divide between the Congress leaders in Haryana and Punjab. The BJP is also in no less a precarious position, as it heads the government in Haryana and is in alliance with the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) in Punjab, where an emergency cabinet meeting said it would not allow SYL to be built at any cost.

The state goes to polls next year and the ruling BJP-Akali Dal combine is trying to thwart tough competition from a resurgent Congress and the Aam Aadmi Party. In Chandigarh, the Punjab Council of Ministers declared that not a single drop of water from Punjab rivers would be allowed to go out of state.

The Constitution Bench, headed by Justice Anil R Dave, held the Punjab Termination of Agreement Act, 2004, on a Presidential reference the same year as unconstitutional and asked the Punjab Government to construct the remaining part of SYL Canal as per the 2003 judgment of the Apex Court to supply Haryana its share of water.

The Bench that comprised Justices Pinaki Chandra Ghose, Shiva Kirti Singh, Adarsh Kumar Goel and Amitava Roy had reserved the verdict on May 12 after the Centre took the neutral stand that the states concerned should settle their dispute themselves. It held that Punjab cannot unilaterally wriggle out of an agreement involving other states.

The Sutlej Yamuna Canal was conceived for sharing Ravi and Beas river waters after Haryana was carved out of Punjab in 1966. However, Punjab has been regularly opposing it, saying its agriculture will suffer. Even before the verdict was delivered, the Akali Dal declared to oppose it if it goes against Punjab's interest. Chief minister Prakash Singh Badal's declaration that Punjab would demand royalty from the riparian states for using its river waters the same way states claim royalty from mineral resources.

The Indus Water Treaty signed by India and Pakistan in 1960 entitled it to unrestricted use of Ravi, Beas and Sutlej waters till they enter Pakistan. Since Sutlej waters were utilised for the Bhakra Nangal Project, the surplus flow from Ravi and Beas was allocated through an agreement under which Punjab got 7.20 MAF (Million Acre Feet), Rajasthan 8 MAF and J&K 0.65 MAF.

However, the reorganisation of Punjab in 1966, to carve out Haryana, led to a notification 10 years later to build the SYL Canal to let Haryana get 3.5 MAF. Both Punjab and Haryana started construction of the Canal in their territories in the eighties when a new agreement was drawn up in December 1981 that gave the highest 8.60 MAF share to Rajasthan, followed by Punjab (4.22 MAF), Haryana (3.50), J&K (0.65 MAF) and Delhi (0.20 MAF for drinking water). The agreement envisaged completion of the canal within two years. The timeline was later extended to August 15, 1986, but the work stopped due to the Sikh insurgency in Punjab and killing of two top engineers of the project.