'Don't Compel Us' : Supreme Court Comes Down Heavily On Punjab Govt Over Not Constructing Sutlej-Yamuna Link Canal

The Bench, comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sudhanshu Dhulia and C.T. Ravikumar, was hearing an original suit filed by the State of Haryana against the State of Punjab in 1996, in which a favourable decree was received by Haryana in 2002. Though the Apex Court had directed Punjab Government to build the SYL canal, however, the dispute between the two states continues to this date.

It may be recalled that the present matter revolves around construction of the proposed 211-kilometre-long canal connecting Sutlej and Yamuna which was planned in 1966 after the re-organisation of Punjab but received momentum only after the centre issued a notification in 1976 that both the states would receive 3.5 million acre-feet (MAF) of water each, and a 1981 water-sharing agreement was signed between them to reallocate the waters of Ravi and Beas. While the Haryana government built 90 kilometres of the canal that fell within its territory, the work in Punjab remained incomplete due to mounting pressure from the opposition parties and other groups at that time.

When the matter was taken up for hearing, Justice Kaul stated: “This kind of a matter possibly has political ramifications…. something will have to be done…. The decree stands.”

Thereafter, addressing Senior Advocate Rakesh Dwivedi who appeared on behalf of the Punjab Government, Justice Kaul stated that this matter is at execution stage and thus, some steps will have to be taken.

“Option of how to construct is in your lap. You will have to come up with some solution. You cannot say that we will sit and talk. It is not working out. The ball is in your Court to find a solution.”

At this, Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for Union of India, averred that they will need some help from the State of Punjab.

Dwivedi tried persuading the Bench that the construction of canal is a water dispute. To this, Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for State of Haryana, negated Dwivedi submission and argued: “The only thing that remains is construction. Punjab, of course, has to cooperate; that is what federalism is about. Once the final authority i.e. our Court decides that the Union Government has to extend its arm…we have tried now…we have to move forward because the decree is two decades long now.”

Moving forward, Justice Kaul told Dwivedi: “You will have to find a solution. Don't compel us to find troublesome orders.”

Justice Kaul then turned to the ASG, "Yes, Union of India, what are you doing...have you filed any report?

ASG Bhati replied in the affirmative but apprised the Bench that settlement and efforts have not gone further.

Pursuant to this, the Bench came down heavily on the state of Punjab for not taking steps for construction. “You find a solution. Otherwise, unpalatable it might be, we will have to do something.”

The Court in its order recorded:

“We are concerned with the execution of a decree for construction of the canal in the Punjab portion as Haryana has already constructed the canal. Lands are acquired and construction is commenced even in Punjab though there may be varying estimates of the extent of the construction which is already completed in Punjab…. We would like the UOI to survey the portion of the land of Punjab allocated for the Project…. An estimate can also be made for the extent of construction carried out in Punjab.”

Previous stories can be read here and here.

Case Title: State of Haryana Department of Irrigation The Secretary v. State of Punjab And Anr. Original Suit No. 6/1996