The Haryana Assembly has passed a resolution seeking the completion of the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) Canal. Why is Punjab against the canal and why was its construction halted in the 1990s?
The Haryana Assembly resolution, seeking completion of the Sutlej Yamuna Link Canal (SYL) Canal, brings the focus back on the long-standing issue of sharing of river waters with Punjab. PTI
The governments of Punjab and Haryana have locked horns over two contentious issues – first over the claim to the capital Chandigarh and now over sharing of river waters. At a special assembly session in Haryana on Tuesday, Chief Minister moved a resolution urging the Centre to take measures for the construction of the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) Canal.
“The right of Haryana to share waters Ravi and Beas rivers by the construction of the SYL Canal is historically, legally, judicially and constitutionally established over time. The august House has unanimously on at least seven occasions passed resolutions urging the early completion of the SYL canal,” the resolution read.
Why was the canal’s construction stalled? And why are the two states at loggerheads over it?
The SYL canal
The Satluj Yamuna Link Canal is a proposed 214-kilometre-long canal connecting Sutlej and Yamuna rivers. It was planned in 1966 after the state of Haryana was carved out of Punjab.
While the decision to share resources was taken, the terms on sharing waters of two rivers, Ravi and Beas, were left undecided.
Punjab, however, was against sharing waters of the two rivers with neighbouring Haryana, citing riparian principles, which state that the owner of land adjacent to a water body has the right to use the water, besides arguing that it had no water to spare.
Centre’s decision on sharing water
In 1976, a decade after the reorganisation of Punjab, the Centre issued a notification that both the states will receive 3.5 million acre-feet (MAF) of water each.
On 31 December 1981, an agreement was made between Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan to reallocate the waters of Ravi and Beas in “overall national interest and for optimum utilisation of the waters”. A reassessment was done and the water flowing down Beas and Ravi was estimated at 17.17 MAF. Of this, 4.22 MAF was allocated to Punjab, 3.5 MAF to Haryana, and 8.6 MAF to Rajasthan, by agreement of all three states.
The canal controversy
On 8 April 1982, then-Prime Minister Indira Gandhi launched the construction of the YSL canal in Kapoori village, Patiala district. The canal was to be 214-kilometre long, of which 122 km was to run across Punjab and 92 km across Haryana.
Punjab’s Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) was not happy and launched a protest against the construction – the Kapoori Morcha.
In July 1985, then-Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi met then-SAD chief Harchand Singh Longowal and signed an accord, agreeing to a new tribunal to assess the water. The Eradi Tribunal was set up, headed by Supreme Court Judge V Balakrishna Eradi. In 1987, it recommended an increase in the shares of Punjab and Haryana to 5 MAF and 3.83 MAF, respectively, according to reports.
The rise in Punjab militancy
However, Punjab saw a rise in militancy and the canal construction became a polarising issue. Longowal was killed by militants in August 1985, less than a month after signing the accord. In 1990, chief engineer M L Sekhri and a superintending engineer Avtar Singh Aulakh were also killed by militants. Several labourers working on the project were shot dead. In wake of the increasing violence, the construction of the SYL canal was stopped in the 1990s. A large part of it was built, costing over Rs 750 crore, according to News18.com.
The Supreme Court steps in
In 2002, the Supreme Court (SC) directed Punjab to continue work on the SYL and complete it within a year. The state refused to oblige; instead, it petitioned for a review of the SC order, which was rejected.
In 2004, following orders by the top court, the Central Public Works Department was appointed to take over the canal work from the Punjab government. However, the state continued to remain defiant.
The Punjab Legislative Assembly passed the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act of 2004, which abrogated all its river water agreements with neighbouring states. Then-President Dr APJ Abdul Kalam referred this Bill to the Supreme Court to decide on its legality in the same year, reports The Quint.
The case came up for hearing in the top court in 2016. In November of that year, it said that the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act 2004, was illegal.
However, Punjab decided to denotify 5,376 acres of land that was acquired for the canal and return it to its original owners free of cost.
In February 2017, the SC stuck to its earlier verdict that the construction of the SYL has to be executed and asked Haryana and Punjab to maintain law and order “at any cost”.
Punjab’s woes
According to a study by the state government, many areas in Punjab will go dry by 2029. The state has already over-exploited its groundwater for irrigation purposes as it fills granaries of the Centre by growing wheat and paddy worth Rs 70,000 crore every year, reports The Indian Express.
Punjab maintains that it is not in a position to share water as the situation is dire.
Haryana’s side of the story
Haryana believes it has been denied its rightful share of water. It says that providing irrigation is tough for the state. There was a problem of drinking water in southern parts of Haryana, where groundwater has depleted up to 1,700 feet, the newspaper reports.
With inputs from agencies
Read all the Latest News, Trending News, Cricket News, Bollywood News,
India News and Entertainment News here. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.