SYL verdict: All you need to know about the 61-year long Satluj-Yamuna Link row

Punjab suffered a serious setback on Thursday as the Supreme Court held as unconstitutional the 2004 law passed by it to terminate the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) canal water sharing agreement with neighbouring states.

The judgement makes it clear that the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004 is "unconstitutional" and Punjab could not have taken a "unilateral" decision to terminate the water sharing agreement with Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan, Jammu and Kashmir, Delhi and Chandigarh.

1955: Agreement signed by Punjab, Jammu & Kashmir, Rajasthan

As per the agreement of 1955, signed between the states of Punjab, Pepsu, Jammu and Kashmir and Rajasthan, Punjab (including Pepsu) was allocated 7.20 Million Acre Feet (MAF) surplus waters of the Ravi and Beas estimated at 15.85 MAF, based on flow series of 1921-45, excluding pro-partition use, Rajasthan was allocated 8.0 MAF and Jammu and Kashmir 0.65 MAF.

Haryana was carved out on the reorganization of erstwhile state of Punjab on November 1, 1966, and as per Section 78 of the Reorganization Act of 1966, the right to receive and to utilize the waters available for distribution, as a result of the Bhakra Nangal Project and BEAS Project, became the right of the successor states in such proportion as may be made by an agreement entered into by the said states after consultation with the central government.

This Section also provided that if no such agreement was entered into within two years of the appointed day, the Centre may by orders determine the shares of the States having regard to the purpose of the projects.

1976: Punjab filed a suit in SC challenging the validity of the Section 78 of the Reorganization Act

As per SC's 1976 notification, Haryana was allocated 3.5 MAF, Punjab 3.5 MAF and Delhi 0.2 MAF out of the total water of 7.2 MAF to be allocated amongst the three from the total available 15.2 MAF water of the Satluj, Ravi and Beas. The remaining water was to go to other states, including Jammu and Kashmir.

The first litigation in the water sharing dispute came in 1976 when Punjab was dissatisfied and filed a suit in the Supreme Court challenging the validity of the Section 78 of the Reorganization Act. Haryana also filed a suit for implementing the Centre's notification of April 24, 1976.

The portion of the canal in Haryana was started during October 1976 and was completed in June 1980 at an expenditure of Rs 56 Crore. 

As Haryana could not utilize its share without a carrier channel in the Punjab territory, Haryana took up the matter with Punjab in the year 1976 to construct the SYL Canal and deposited Rs 1.0 Crore in November 1976 and another Rs 1 Crore in March, 1979.

Haryana filed a suit against Punjab for failure to take up construction of SYL Canal in their territory.  Punjab also filed a suit in the apex court on July 11, 1979 challenging the orders of Centre of March, 1976.

1981: Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan signed an agreement to share the waters of rivers Ravi, Beas and Satluj

During pendency of the suit, however, an agreement was entered into Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan on December 31, 1981, under which 17.17 MAF surplus Ravi Beas waters, assessed on revised flow series of 1921-60, were agreed to be allocated to Punjab 4.22 MAF, Haryana 3.50 MAF, Rajasthan 8.60 MAF, J-K 0.65 MAF and Delhi 0.20 MAF. It was further stipulated in the Agreement, known as the Indira Gandhi Award of 1981 that Punjab would complete the SYL Canal within a period of 2 years, i.e. up to December 31,1983. Haryana and Punjab withdrew their pending suits from SC. 

Former Punjab CM Amarinder Singh got this agreement and all other subsequent agreements annulled "to protect the interests of the border state" even though this agreement was signed with Indira Gandhi as Prime Minister. 

Earlier in 1960 the Indus Waters Treaty was signed between India and Pakistan under which water of the Ravi, Beas and Satluj were reserved for exclusive use by India after transition period.

Six years later in 1966 when Punjab was reorganized, the Section 78 of the Reorganization Act provided for the apportioning of rights and liabilities of the existing state of Punjab among the successor states (Haryana and Himachal Pradesh) in relation to the Bhakhra-Nangal project and the Beas project, by agreement entered into by the states after consultation with the Centre.

But since the 1981 Indira Gandhi award failed to see the light of the day and she was assassinated in 1984, her son and successor Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi initiated steps to resolve the inter-state issues and on July 24, 1985 the 'The Punjab Settlement' popularly known as the 'Rajiv Longowal Accord' was signed at Delhi with a new deadline, August 15, 1986, being set for the completion of the SYL canal to carry Haryana's share of Ravi Beas water.

Paragraph 9 of this accord, bearing the question of sharing of river waters provided that the farmers of Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan will continue to get waters not less than what they were using from the Ravi Beas system as on July 1, 1985. Water used for consumptive purposes will remain unaffected.

The claim of Punjab and Haryana regarding the shares in their remaining water was to be referred for adjudication to a Tribunal to be presided over by a Supreme Court Judge. The decision of this tribunal was to be rendered within six months and was to be binding on both parties. All legal and constitutional steps in this respect were to be taken expeditiously.

The construction of the SYL Canal was to continue and the canal was to be completed by August 15, 1986. In pursuance of the Rajiv Longowal Accord the Centre- constituted a Tribunal namely Ravi Beas Waters Tribunal (Eradi Tribunal) on April 2, 1986. The tribunal gave its report on January 30, 1987 and the quantum of water used by the farmers and other consumptive users of the three party states as on 1st July 1985, was estimated for Punjab at 3.106 MAF.

The Punjab share was inclusive of 0.352 MAF of permissive use allowed by Rajasthan under clause (ii) of the 1981 agreement and subject thereto but was exclusive of the pre-partition use of 1.98 MAF as well as 0.32 MAF in Shah Nehar Canal areas. The share of Haryana was 1.620 MAF and Rajasthan 4.985 MAF (This figure is exclusive of the pre-partition use of 1.11 MAF).

The Eradi Tribunal on adjudication of the claims of Punjab and Haryana regarding the shares in their remaining waters, the tribunal decided to allocate surplus Ravi Beas waters to Punjab 5.00 MAF and Haryana 3.83 MAF. The Tribunal stressed the need for the completion of the SYL canal "at an early date since this canal is lifeline for the farmers of Haryana."

The Eradi Tribunal in its report increased the surplus Ravi Beas waters by another 1.11 MAF available downstream of run stations, fixed the total availability at 18.28 MAF. It provided Punjab 5.00 MAF, Haryana 3.83 MAF, Rajasthan 8.60 MAF, J-K 0.65 MAF and Delhi 0.20 MAF. But both Punjab and Haryana Governments filed the applications under Section 5(3) of the Interstate Water Disputes Act, 1956 for some clarifications/guidance on the report of the Tribunal.

Haryana prayed to clarify and confirm that the usages of the three states, to allocate the remaining 4.831 MAF of un-allocated Ravi Beas waters below the run stations to the state of Haryana, while Punjab sought modification of Tribunal's findings regarding verification of waters used by the various states because it is contrary to the provisions of the "Punjab Settlement".

Punjab also challenged the decision of Tribunal that Haryana and Rajasthan are Indus Basin States being erroneous and also the Decision of the tribunal rejecting the contention of Punjab having sole proprietary/Ownership rights of Ravi-Beas rivers being against the legal provisions. Punjab had then itself challenged the finding of the Tribunal regarding holding valid the two agreements of 1955 and 1981 and the order of 1976 being erroneous.

But due to disturbed conditions in Punjab, the tribunal could not assemble for conclusive hearing on these applications. The Tribunal was then adjourned sine die in April, 1989.

Realizing that the progress of construction of SYL Canal in Punjab portion was not going up to the targeted schedule, Haryana took up the matter with Prime Minister and at a meeting on December 16, 1986, it was decided that entire cost of SYL Canal will be borne by the Centre.

The work was resumed and progress continued till July 23, 1990 when work came to a halt due to gunning down of two senior engineers and some others of Punjab including the Chief Engineer and the Superintending Engineer engaged on the work.

Haryana on November 23, 1990 wrote to Prime Minister to entrust the balance work to some Central Agency like National Hydel Power Corporation, Border Roads Organization (BRO) or any other suitable agency. As a result, the construction of the canal was decided to be handed over to BRO by Government of India on February 20, 1991 but there could not be any progress.

Thereafter the issue was highlighted by Haryana at various levels and fora but the construction activities could not be resumed even though 95 per cent of the work in Punjab portion stood completed up to June, 1990.

Not only that there is uncertainty but a substantial amount of money spent has not been put to any use. The project cost which is being funded by the Centre since December 16, 1986 has escalated from Rs 176 Crore in 1983 to an estimated cost of Rs 601 Crore (11/94 price index level). The cost is likely to escalate further as an amount of Rs 679.90 Crore has been spent in Punjab portion up to September 2001.

Due to continuous delay in the completion of the canal, Haryana is unable to fully utilize about 3 lakh hectares of irrigation potential already created in the state and is losing incremental agricultural production of over 8 lakh tones per annum amounting to several Crore of rupees besides having drinking water scarcity in several parts of the State. SYL Canal is being misused by Punjab for passing their flood waters to Haryana territories, adding miseries to the farmers of Haryana, state irrigation department officials say.

After all the efforts of Haryana to persuade Punjab directly and through the Union Government to get the SYL Canal completed did not materialize, Haryana approached the Apex Court through suit No-1 of 1995 filed in November 95. The suit was refilled as suit No-6 of 1996 after issuance of notices under section 80 C P C. The hearings of this case were held in the Apex Court during the year 1996 to 2001.

2002: SC directs Punjab to complete construction of SYL canal within a year

The Supreme Court passed an order on January 15, 2002 and directed Punjab government that SYL Canal should be completed within a period of one year. In case state of Punjab fails to accomplish the task within the stipulated period, then the Union Government should get the work done through its own agencies as expeditiously as possible.

2004: Punjab enacts the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004

Punjab enacted the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004 just two days before the July 15,2004 deadline when the Centre was to take over physical possession of the Canal from Punjab Irrigation Department and hand over the construction to the CPWD for completion of the disputed Canal.

Punjab had all along maintained that "justice" should be done as per the recognized international riparian laws. The state had taken the stand that endeavour should be to determine the share of Punjab rivers on acknowledged principles of distribution and allocation between the "riparian" states, namely, on the basis of the equitable share of each state.

Interestingly, none of the states that have been a party to the unsolved issue is a riparian state, except Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir. The other non-riparian states are Haryana, Rajasthan and Delhi.