E-Paper
Punjab sets neighbours on fire with water
By annulling water deals, Punjab has raked up many legal, political and constitutional issues. In Graphics
By annulling all previous agreements pertaining to the Ravi-Beas waters with Haryana and Rajasthan, Punjab has sought to take the issue from the legal to the political and constitutional arena. By doing so, Punjab chief minister Captain Amarinder Singh will gain immediate political mileage. At the same time, he opens himself to numerous pitfalls.
The controversial Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004, passed by the Vidhan Sabha is a powerful political statement. Numerous compulsions have driven Singh to this extreme step. First of all, Punjab had no option but to abide by the Supreme Court's June 4 order directing the Centre to take up the construction of the 121 km Punjab portion of the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) canal, which Punjab had been refusing to make.
With the final award of the Eradi Tribunal, constituted to adjudicate the claims of sharing of the remaining Ravi-Beas waters, expected any day, the state's legal options were all but closed. "With the SC deadline only three days away and the Eradi Award staring it in the face, broadbasing the issue was the only option," explained one of the CM's aides.
Secondly, Singh has wrested the initiative from the Shiromani Akali Dal. The Akalis had been seeking annulment of all previous water agreements. Now Singh can claim that he did what Akalis failed to do.
The Vidhan Sabha polls in Haryana due next year could be another compulsion of the Congress as the Indian National Lok Dal led by Om Prakash Chautala, is expected to encash on its "success" in getting the long standing waters dispute resolved in Haryana's favour.
But the issue has kicked up numerous imponderables, including some constitutional concerns. Can a state unilaterally annul an agreement with inter-state ramifications? What would be the status of such a Act if another state passed a contrary law? Can the Parliament or the Supreme Court negate such a statute?
Another question raised is should the Punjab governor have given his assent overnight, without getting it scrutinised by legal experts.
In fact, the Act could run foul of not just Parliament but also the SC. By repudiating the Eradi Tribunal, it has challenged the Inter State Water Disputes Act, 1956, an act of Parliament. The relevant clauses of the Rajiv-Longowal Accord of 1985 on the basis of which the Eradi Tribunal was constituted is a part of the Inter State Water Disputes Act now. Further, an amendment in the Act of 1956 brought about in 2002 now states that the award of the Tribunal would be considered a judgement of the Supreme Court.
It is apparent that from an intra-state squabble with the Akalis and an inter state dispute with Haryana, Amarinder Singh, backed by the new Act, has decided to widen its ambit. He has decided to ride the tiger.
