Centre convenes Aug 18 meet to prod Punjab to complete Sutlej-Yamuna link canal

Punjab has refused to complete the remaining part of the Sutlej-Yamuna Link canal arguing that the volume of water available in its rivers has drastically reduced over the years.

Union water resources minister Gajendra Singh Shekhawat will hold a meeting with chief ministers of Haryana and Punjab on August 18 to work out a solution for implementation of Supreme Court’s January 15, 2002, and June 4, 2004, orders to complete the remaining portion of the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) canal by Punjab.

Earthmovers filling up the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) canal near Rajpura.(HT FILE PHOTO)

The meeting has been convened on the directions of the apex court of July 28.

In a communication to Haryana chief minister, ML Khattar and his Punjab counterpart, Capt Amarinder Singh, the Union Minister has sought their presence in New Delhi on August 18 for the meeting. “The Haryana chief minister has written back to the Union minister to inform that he will attend the August 18 meeting,’’ said a top official.

The apex court during a July 28 hearing had observed that “let the Chief Ministers of both the states meet to find out the solution if any, else there is a decree which has to be executed”. The SC had also ordered that the outcome of the same, if any, be informed to the court when the case is listed later this month.

The Union water resources ministry has recorded Punjab government’s unwillingness to complete the canal after several rounds of meetings between central, Haryana and Punjab governments in 2019 remained inconclusive.

Talks were held on the orders of the Supreme Court to work out a solution to implement apex court’s judgments to complete the remaining portion of the SYL canal in Punjab.

Top Haryana officials who attended the meetings said the Central ministry has recorded Punjab’s refusal to complete the canal in the minutes of the meetings held between the officials of the two states and the Centre.

“Punjab has clearly refused to complete the canal on the pretext of non-availability of spare water. Punjab’s argument was a mere excuse to not implement the apex court’s orders,’’ said a Haryana official.

“Completing the construction of the canal and availability of water are two separate issues altogether. The water availability issue is relevant once the capacity to carry the water is in place,’’ said an official.

Quoting an example, the officials said that during the rainy season when there are no restrictions on water indent, the surplus water of the Ravi and Beas can be used for Haryana’s parched southern districts to supplement the receding groundwater table. “Otherwise this surplus water goes to Pakistan,’’ officials said.

On July 9, 2019, the SC had requested the Punjab and Haryana chief ministers to constitute a committee of officers and ensure that deliberations took place with the intervention of the Central government at the highest level to work out a solution. During a September 2019 hearing, the apex court had granted four more months to hold out mediation and resolve the dispute.

The apex court had said that it hoped and trusted that functionaries of both the states will rise to the occasion to find out a solution which is in the interest of all and ultimately if this Court is required to hear the matter on merits definitely it will do so.

Haryana has stuck to its stance that its share of 3.5 million acre feet (MAF) in the Ravi and Beas waters and the completion of the canal are absolutely non-negotiable. At present, Haryana gets 1.62 MAF of Ravi and Beas waters. Punjab on the other hand is furthering an argument that the volume of water available in its rivers has drastically reduced over the years.

The apex court had on July 11, 2017, said that the authorities of both states remember that a decree passed by the apex court has to be respected and executed. “Our granting of time does not endow Punjab with any kind of liberty to devour time and pave the path of procrastination. On the contrary, to take a stand of amiability and amicability so that the facilitator, that is, the central government can bring both parties together to resolve the issue,” the SC had said.

Addressing a presidential reference in the matter, a constitution bench of the Supreme Court had on November 10, 2016, set aside the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, a law which unilaterally terminated Punjab’s water sharing pact with Haryana.

“The Punjab Act cannot be said to be in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution and by virtue of the said Act, Punjab cannot nullify the judgment and decree referred to herein above and terminate the December 1981 agreement,” the Supreme Court had said.