Punjab and Haryana High Court criticized Punjab for blocking water flow to Haryana from the Nangal dam. The Court warned against turning inter-state issues into internal conflicts.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Tuesday expressed strong concern over the growing water dispute between Punjab and Haryana.
The Court pointed out that while India is already facing external challenges and taking steps against its enemy country, such behavior should not be repeated among the States within the country.
The matter was heard by a Division Bench consisting of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel. The issue arose after the Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB) filed a petition against Punjab, accusing it of taking control of the Nangal dam and stopping the release of water to Haryana.
Chief Justice Nagu remarked, referring to the inter-state tensions that resemble international disputes.
“We are doing this to our enemy country. Let us not do this within our States,”
The situation escalated when the Punjab government deployed extra police forces at the Nangal dam after a decision was made to release more water to Haryana.
BBMB approached the Court saying this action was obstructing the water release.
Senior Advocate Rajesh Garg, representing BBMB, argued that the issue was very serious.
He said,
“The reservoir is going to overflow and the downstream States are going to go dry,” highlighting the possible damage if water was not released in time.
In response, Punjab government stood firm on its stand, saying that maintaining law and order is the State’s responsibility.
Senior Advocate Gurminder Singh, appearing for the State of Punjab, said,
“Law and order is the State subject. BBMB cannot say what police should do or police would be deployed. They want illegal resolutions implemented. In such a delicate time when border tensions are there, please take into consideration.”
Advocate Garg responded by warning that if Punjab’s argument is accepted, other States might also raise similar claims.
He said,
“Tomorrow Himachal may say same for Bhakra dam. This dispute is related to Nangal dam which is in Punjab.”
Additional Solicitor General Satya Pal Jain supported the BBMB and stressed that Punjab’s actions were not appropriate.
He said that if anyone disagreed with the BBMB’s decision, they should legally challenge it.
he stated,
“Flow of water permitted by BBMB is not just for Haryana but Rajasthan also. The BBMB resolution for release of water has not been challenged. Anybody aggrieved of BBMB decision has to challenge that,”
He also mentioned that Punjab’s actions are not in good spirit and could set a wrong precedent.
he submitted before the Court,
“The water is not out of share of Punjab. For me all states are equal. Water comes from Himachal. What happens tomorrow if they stop. This is not in good spirit,”
He requested the Court to direct removal of Punjab Police from the Nangal dam area. The Bench then asked, “Who looks after security (of the dam),” to which Singh replied, “Punjab Police does.”
BBMB’s lawyer, Rajesh Garg, demanded the deployment of central paramilitary forces at the dam.
He said,
“It was always with Punjab Police but there were 15 personnel only. Suddenly the number has risen to 55. Their political workers are there. Director Security of dam has a role. He has all right to object. If Punjab Police role is doubtful, the Court can order deployment of paramilitary force.”
The judges also seemed to agree that sensitive installations like dams are usually protected by central forces.
the Bench observed,
“Such institutions are always manned by central paramilitary forces,”
However, Singh objected strongly to the claims made by BBMB, saying the counsel was trying to tarnish the image of Punjab Police.
Meanwhile, Haryana’s Advocate General Parminder Singh Chauhan stated that Punjab Police had taken over the operational control at Nangal dam and was trying to stop water supply to other States.
He told the Court,
“They (Punjab) are opposing distribution of water tooth and nail. Under the garb of protecting the dam, what are they doing. This is not their job. The demand of 8,500 cusecs is not just for Haryana but Delhi also. 1049 is for Delhi, 850 is for Rajasthan.”
He further informed the Court that the BBMB, which is an expert technical body, had passed the order to release more water after Haryana made a demand.
He stated that any disagreement with this decision should have been taken to the Central Government instead of Punjab unilaterally taking police action.
AG Chauhan told the Court,
“BBMB is the expert body. We have raised our demand and technical committee has ordered release of 8500 cusecs. Punjab has objected but decision has been made. Punjab can approach Central government now but their actions at present are not only illegal but unconstitutional,”
However, Advocate Gurminder Singh, appearing for Punjab, said the claims made were one-sided and false.
Singh said,
“Half facts are being told. This is very unfortunate. BBMB has misled the Court. What is being stated before milords is nothing but a bunch of lies. Their immediate concern and prayer stands addressed. Police is not interfering. AG has instructions to state that. End of story,”
After hearing all the arguments from both sides, the Court said it would pass its order later today.
This case has once again brought the spotlight on inter-state water disputes and the urgent need for cooperation among States, especially when such disputes can affect millions of people across various regions.
Click Here to Read More Reports On Water
