If You Don't Act Against 'Tanker Mafia', We'll Ask Delhi Police : Supreme Court To Delhi Govt On Water Crisis

A Vacation Bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Prasanna B Varale was hearing the Delhi Government's plea seeking directions to the State of Haryana for immediate release of water to the crisis-hit national capital. The petition underscored the acute shortage of water faced by its citizens amidst the severe heatwave prevailing across the nothern states.

Further, it also apprised that the State of Himachal Pradesh has agreed to share its surplus water with Delhi. However, it does not share a physical boundary with the Union Territory, and thus, the water is required to be routed through existing water channels/river systems in the State of Haryana to eventually be released to Delhi at the Wazirabad barrage.

Previously, the Court had directed the Himachal Pradesh Government to transfer 137 cusecs of water to the Hathnikund barrage in Haryana and asked the Haryana Government to facilitate the transfer of the surplus water received from HP to Delhi through the Wazirabad barrage. In furtherance to this, the Court also directed the Upper Yamuna River Board to submit a status report regarding the measures it has undertaken to ensure the onward supply of water released from Himachal Pradesh to Delhi.

Following this, the day before yesterday, the Court pulled up the Delhi Government for not curing the defects in its petition. The Court warned that if the defects are not cured, then the petition will be dismissed, and accordingly, it adjourned the matter to today. 

During today's hearing, the Court asked why the petitioners as to why the Secretaries are not filing the affidavits. Post this, the Court said that the letter filed by the Himachal says that the water has already been released, meaning thereby they have no excess water.

“The entire basis of your writ petition is that Himachal has excess water. If you are already releasing it, why was it not made known to the meeting of the Yamuna board on June 5th pursuant to our order….Why false statements are made before the Court? ”, said Justice Mishra.

Moving forward, Advocate Shadan Farasat, representing the Delhi Government, orally told the Court about some of the measures taken. It included massive disconnections and usage of water for only essential purposes.

“We are in a catch-22 situation with very little water. In so far as police is concerned, we will be more than happy to have the Police take action in this.”

Senior Advocate AM Singhvi, appearing virtually for the GNCTD, also said as per the order passed by the Yamuna board in the year 2018, Delhi must get 1013 cusecs as per the decision. However, as against this 1013 cusecs, the actual water received is varying 800-900 cusecs with 900 cusecs received only twice.

At this, Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for Haryana, chimed in and asserted that the submissions are beyond the scope of today's hearing. He said that incorrect statements are being made and this hearing is related to the compliance of the previous (June 06th) order.

“The board is the expert body which decides on this issue and now they are trying to reopen it…suppressing these documents.,” he added.

Echoing this sentiment, Justice Mishra said, “That is what I was about to say in the beginning itself, that those orders have been suppressed by the petitioners.” Saying thus, the Court expressed its inclination to take up the matter tomorrow and will hear the other aspects of the matter.

Underscoring the importance of the matter, the Court said that even if we can save 5 or 10% loss of the water out of the total then, it would be beneficial for the citizens.

The Court, by the end, also asked the advocate general of Himachal Pradesh to keep its officer present tomorrow. This was in the context of the latest report filed by the HP Government. “why false statement is made in Court.?,” the Court asked.

“We are persuaded to pass the interim order based on your statement that you have excess water. Now, you say that you do not have excess water,” the Court said.

When the Counsel added that the State has excess water, the Court strictly responded, “Then you are in contempt. If you have excess water and you are not supplying that excess water, you are in contempt. Be ready...On that day when we had passed the order that excess water will be released by tomorrow and it will be measured… If it is already coming, where is the question of fresh measurement?, ” the Court said before passing the aforementioned order and adjourning the matter to tomorrow. 

Case Title: GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS., Diary No. 25504-2024