E-Paper
‘SYL canal construction and water availability not linked’
Inter State Water Disputes Act amended in 1986 for resolving the quantum of water issues between Punjab and Haryana does not speak about completion of SYL construction
: The construction of Sutlej Yamuna Link (SYL) canal was in no way linked to the quantum of water available to the states of Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan.
Chief minister Manohar Lal Khattar who took part in another round of meeting on Wednesday in New Delhi with his Punjab counterpart Bhagwant Mann to resolve the deadlock over the completion of the canal told the Punjab delegation that construction of SYL as ordered by the Supreme Court was a matter not covered under the Inter State Water Disputes Act, 1956.
Haryana’s response came on the claim being made by Punjab that it does not have a drop of water to share with Haryana, implying that the completion of SYL canal would be a rather futile exercise due to non-availability of water in Punjab.
Punjab chief minister Bhagwant Mann on Wednesday expressed his helplessness to implement the apex court’s orders and told Khattar and Union jal shakti minister Gajendra Singh Shekhwat that Punjab did not have water to share with Haryana.
How the two issues are not linked
As per para 9 of the Rajiv Longowal Memorandum of Settlement (Accord) of July 24, 1985 regarding sharing of river waters, the farmers of Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan will continue to get water not less than what they are using from the Ravi-Beas system as on July 7, 1985.
Para 9.1 of the Accord said that waters used for consumptive purposes will also remain unaffected and quantum of usage claimed shall be verified by the tribunal referred to in para 9.2 below.
Para 9.2 said that the claims of Punjab and Haryana regarding the shares in their remaining waters will be referred for adjudication to a tribunal to be presided over by a Supreme Court judge. The decision of this tribunal will be rendered within six months and would be binding on both parties. All legal and constitutional steps required in this respect shall be taken expeditiously, it said.
Significantly, para 9.3 of the Accord said that the construction of the SYL canal shall continue and shall be completed by August 15, 1986.
Subsequently, an amendment was made in the Inter State Water Disputes Act, 1956 on April 2, 1986 and section 14 pertaining to constitution of Ravi-Beas Waters Tribunal was inserted.
Section 14 of the Act clearly says that the Central government may constitute a Tribunal known as the Ravi and Beas Waters Tribunal for the verification and adjudication of the matters referred to in paragraphs 9.1 and 9.2, respectively, of the Punjab Settlement (Rajiv Longowal accord).
Section 14 (3) says that when a tribunal has been constituted, the Central government alone may suo motu or at the request of the concerned state government refer the matters specified in paragraphs 9.1 and 9.2 of the Punjab Settlement to such tribunal.
“So, it is quite explicit that the matter of construction of the SYL canal does not figure in the Inter State Water Disputes Act and is not linked to the quantum of water available,” said an official.
