Chandigarh: Both Haryana and Punjab assemblies last week passed unanimous resolutions against the water cess imposed by Himachal Pradesh on hydropower projects even as they have failed to resolve the long-standing issue of sharing the same river water via Sutlej Yamuna Link (SYL) canal.
This became evident when the contentious SYL canal issue came up for hearing in the Supreme Court last Thursday. Haryana said the water came via Punjab and the latter was not abiding by the court’s order on the construction of the SYL canal. Meanwhile, Punjab pleaded that it is facing water scarcity, and hence, has none to spare.
Media reports quoted Punjab as saying on the issue of the canal, “There is no point in building canals like Taj Mehal when there is no water to flow.”
With the two sides sticking to their stands, the Supreme Court told the central government to play a more proactive role than being a mute spectator. The next date of hearing is 4 October.
Author and political commentator Pawan Kumar Bansal said Punjab has been unreasonable on SYL and sharing of river waters with Haryana despite the reports of several tribunals and the SC verdict in favour of the latter.
“Punjab went to the extent of passing a law abrogating all accords on this issue and asking its farmers to fill up the canal constructed in its territory, and take back possession of their lands acquired years ago for the SYL. But when Himachal imposed a cess on water, it exhibited a unique camaraderie with Haryana by passing a unanimous resolution like its neighbour,” he said to ThePrint.
He said the issue has become more of a political one, “otherwise why will Punjab allow billions of litres of water to go across the border to Pakistan but not give Haryana its legitimate share.”
The Himachal Pradesh assembly passed the Himachal Pradesh Water Cess on Hydropower Generation Bill, 2023 on 16 March. The government hopes to generate a revenue of Rs 4,000 crore by imposing the cess on 172 projects. Defending the decision, Himachal Jal Shakti Minister Mukesh Agnihotri was quoted by media as saying that water is a state subject, and the state was within its right to impose the cess.
Among the hydropower projects in Himachal are the Bhakra Nangal and Beas projects which supply water and power to Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh, Delhi and Chandigarh.
Thorny issue
When Haryana was carved out of an undivided Punjab in 1966, the other resources were divided between the two but the issue of the division of river waters was left undecided.
Punjab was opposed to sharing river waters, citing the riparian principle, while Haryana’s claim was based on the equitable distribution of all resources between the two states.
The riparian principle provides that the state from which a river passes has the right to its waters.
A decade later, when the country was under Emergency, a notification issued by the central government allocated 3.5 million acre-feet (MAF) of water each to Haryana and Punjab.
In order to make full use of the allocated water, a 211-km long SYL was planned — 121 km of it was to be constructed in Punjab territory while the rest of 90 km was in Haryana, show government records.
In 1981, another accord was signed that gave 4.22 MAF of the Ravi and Beas waters to Punjab, 3.5 MAF to Haryana. Haryana completed its part of the canal in 1980, but Punjab did not.
In 1985, then prime minister Rajiv Gandhi signed the Punjab Accord with Harchand Singh Longowal, then president of Shiromani Akali Dal, and one of its provisions was to set up another tribunal to settle the water dispute with Haryana.
Less than a month later, Longowal was gunned down by some men opposed to the Punjab Accord. In 1990, militants also gunned down two senior engineers and 32 labourers working on the canal.
The Eradi Commission headed by Supreme Court judge V. Balakrishna Eradi set up in accordance with the Rajiv-Longowal accord, allocated 5 MAF of water to Punjab and 3.83 MAF to Haryana.
The legal battle has been ongoing since 1996 when Haryana moved to the Supreme Court for its share of water.
In 2002, the SC directed Punjab to continue work on the SYL and complete it within a year. The state moved a review against the SC order but the petition was rejected.
In 2004, when the SC asked the Central Public Works Department (CPWD) to take over the construction of SYL, the Punjab assembly passed the Punjab Termination of Agreement Act, 2004, abrogating all accords on the distribution of waters.
Upon a presidential reference, the apex court set aside the law passed by the government and told the central government to execute the construction work.
During the course of proceedings last Thursday, Attorney General R Venkataramani informed the apex court that the central government has made all endeavours and has held meetings with both Haryana and Punjab, but no consensus could be reached.
The Supreme Court told the central government to find a workable solution to the problem.
United against water cess?
A day earlier, the assemblies of Haryana and Punjab had passed unanimous resolutions against the Himachal government’s proposal to impose water cess on hydropower projects.
Moving the resolution in the Punjab assembly, Water Resources Minister Gurmeet Singh Meet Hayer said Himachal’s proposal meant an additional burden of Rs 1,200 crore on the partner states, with the major share to be paid by Punjab.
Haryana Chief Minister Manohar Lal Khattar, who moved the resolution in the state assembly, said that of this Rs 1,200 crore, his state will have to pay Rs 366 crore, adding that this will make power costlier in the state.
Media reports quoted both the states terming the proposed cess as against the Inter-State Waters Disputes Act, 1956.
However, Himachal Pradesh has maintained that its ordinance to charge water cess doesn’t affect any state’s riparian rights, and there can be no inter-state dispute as the projects are located in Himachal only.
(Edited by Smriti Sinha)
Also read: Amritpal trained men to use weapons at makeshift firing range in his village: Punjab Police