INTRODUCTION: -
If the Sutlej - Yamuna Link canal were a Hollywood epic, its producers would
undoubtedly have advertised it as the most experience and useless ditch ever
built. Upwards of Rs. 850 cores have been spent building the 306 km long canal.
But because Punjab refuses to build the small section of the project that has
yet to be completed, it carries no water. The 1700 - strong staff that Punjab
employs to build the canal has not had a day's serious work for the past two
decades. Infact, the whole issue has been reduced to a mockery involving the
politicians' repartees and the Courts' judgments.
DATELINE OF SYL ISSUE:-
The problem began in November 1966, when Punjab was divided & two new states
were formed - Haryana & Himachal Pradesh. The development of the issue in the
succeeding years is given below: -
- 1966: The Reorganization Act of 1966 made it
mandatory for the Union Government to divide the waters of Satluj & Beas river
systems, if Punjab & Haryana were unable to arrive at a mutually acceptable
solution.
- 1969: The SYL Project is conceived.
- 1974 : Since no agreement could be hammered out
between Punjab and Haryana, New Delhi divided the unutilized water of Satluj &
Beas river systems, thereby allotting Haryana a share in the said rivers.
However, the order was unacceptable to Punjab & it moved the Court.
- 1979 : The Haryana Government files its first suit
in the apex court seeking direction to the PunjabGovt. to complete the
construction of its portion of the SYL canal.
- 1980 : Haryana segment of the canal, i.e. approx
91 Kms is completed.
- 1981 : Punjab withdraws its suit filed against the
order of 1974 & instead arrives at an agreement with Haryana regarding the water
flow.
- 1985: the Rajiv Gandhi Longowal Accord is signed.
The agreement mandated that Chandigarh was to be made capital of Punjab and that
both Haryana and Punjab would swap Hindi and Punjabi speaking areas on their
borders. In turn Punjab would build the SYL canal to carry water to Haryana. The
Eradi Tribunal was also appointed to decide the Ravi-Beas Water Dispute between
the two states.
- 1990 : Work in Punjab portion of the Canal comes
to a halt after Project Chief Engineer M.L. Sekhri &senior officer A.S. Aulakh
are shot dead. In another incident terrorists opposed to the construction of the
canal mow down 30 laborers at Ropar.
- 1996: A fter efforts at the administrative &
political level fail, Haryana filed a suit in Supreme Court foe directions to
Punjab for early completion of the canal.
- 1997: State of Punjab and the Union of India file
their replies, in the above suit.
- 2001: Last hearing of the case is held and the
judgment is reserved by the Supreme Court. Four weeks are granted to the
Government of India for arriving at a mutual settlement between Governements of
Punjab and Haryana.
- 2002: On January 15, Supreme Court directed the
Punjab Government to complete the canal within one year. In case it fails to do
so, then it would be the duty of Government of India to complete thecanal within
one year.
- 2003: One day before the expiry of the deadline,
Punjab Government makes a prayer to the Court to absolve it of the
responsibility of the construction of the canal because of the changed
circumstances. Meanwhile Haryana files an execution application for the
implementation of the 2002 Award.
- 2004: On June 4, the Supreme Court allows the
execution application of Haryana and directs the Central Government to appoint
an agency to construct the remaining portion of the canal.
THE HOT DEBATE:
In the above lined legal battle, both the states put forth their respective
views. Punjab in essence, arguesthat it has no surplus water to release. While
17.17 million acre feet ( maf ) was earlier believed to have been available in
Ravi-Beas systems, Punjab says, the flow data of 1981- 2002 show only 14.37 maf
in its hands. As a result, the transfer of water to Haryana would affect 9 lakh
acres of irrigated land in Ferozepur, Muktsar, Moga and Faridkot. The recharge
of Punjab 's depleted groundwater resources would also be hit hard. Punjab also
argues that release of water through the SYL canal is contingent on other
components of the Rajiv Gandhi-Longowal accord, including handing over of
Chandigarh to Punjab and the transfer of Punjabi speaking areas of Haryana to
Punjab . Finally Punjab claims that Haryana has no claims to the waters of
rivers that do not flow through its territory.
Haryana has also put up an impressive argument in the case. The failure to build
the canal was costing Haryana Rs.1000 Crores per year. Moreover the fact that
Haryana had completed its portion of the canalway back in 1980, has stood as a
strong point in its favour, throughout the legal proceedings.
FINAL VERDICT OF SUPREME COURT:-
On June 4, 2004 the apex Court announced its final verdict on the SYL issue, the
highlights of which are as follows:-
- The Court rejected Punjab 's counter-suit challenging the January 15, 2002
decision by which the state was to construct the remaining part of the canal by
January 15,2003 . Instead it accepted Haryana's application for implementation
of the Court's January 15, 2002 Award.
- Since the Punjab Government had failed to complete the canal within the one year
deadline imposed by the January 15, 2002 verdict, so the Court directed the
Centre to construct the unfinished portionof the SYL canal.
- The Court ordered the Union Government to appoint a central agency within four
weeks for the execution of the work.
- The Court castigated the Punjab Government by saying that it had acted as a
"super-judicial" body over the apex Court, by refusing to comply with the 2002
decree of the Court. It also imposed the cost of litigation on Punjab .
- The Punjab Government was also ordered to provide adequate security to the
officials of the executing agency and to the construction workers engaged by it.
- The executing agency was directed to prepare a new map of the canal on the basis
of a fresh survey by keeping in mind that no damage was caused to the green belt
falling in the way.
THE WAY AHEAD:-
Even if the SYL canal is completed as per Supreme Court's verdict, where will
the water come from? At a recent conference top Engineer G.S.Dhillon pointed out
that in 1955, Punjab had 34.8 maf of water in all forms, but now it is left with
a reserve of only 12.8 maf. The groundwater levels pf Punjab are falling and the
areas on the state's borders were waterlogged owing to seepage from poorly
maintained canals. In such circumstances construction of the canal would not
diminish the plight of the farmers.
Instead of slugging out in the Court, both the Courts should consider doing
their farmers a real favour. Union Government backed plans of subsidies for
farmers introducing sprinklers and drip irrigation should be implemented. By
stopping early sowing in May and June, and moving away from water-hungry crops
like paddy and sugarcane to a welter of crops that need less water, both states
can attempt at conserving water. If these efforts take root, the outcome of the
SYL battle might just prove irrelevant.
You can send us your query now on
query@nrilegalservices.com or click on
Send a Query.
|