HC restrains Punjab from interfering in BBMB operations, orders release of additional water to Haryana

Indian Express

07-05-2025

In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday restrained the State of Punjab and its functionaries, including police personnel, from interfering in the day-to-day functioning, operation, and regulation of the Bhakra Nangal Dam and the Lohand Control Room Water Regulation Offices. The court also directed Punjab to comply with the central government's decision to release additional water to Haryana, taken during a meeting chaired by the Union Home Secretary on May 2.
The order was passed by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel on May 6, in response to multiple petitions, the main one by the Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB), concerning the management of the dam and distribution of its water.
The court's intervention followed allegations that Punjab had deployed police personnel on May 1 to forcibly take control of the dam and control room, obstructing the operations of the Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB). The move came after BBMB decided on April 23 to release 8,500 cusecs of water to Haryana, which was later revised to include 4,500 cusecs of extra water for eight days to meet Haryana's urgent irrigation and drinking water needs.
BBMB's counsel Rajesh Garg argued that Punjab's actions violated the Punjab Reorganization Act, 1966, which places the dam under the control of the central government. He pointed to a report from BBMB's chief engineer detailing the takeover and referenced meeting minutes where a majority decision was made to release the water, despite Punjab's objections. That decision was later upheld in the central government-led meeting on May 2.
Representing Punjab, senior advocate Gurminder Singh and advocate general Maninderjit Singh Bedi defended the police deployment as a security measure, arguing that law and order falls under the state's jurisdiction. They also maintained that Punjab had not overdrawn its water quota, having used 5.18 MAF against its allocation of 5.56 MAF. In contrast, Haryana and Rajasthan were reported to have overdrafts of 3.13 MAF and 3.684 MAF respectively.
Additional solicitor general of India Satya Pal Jain supported BBMB's position, urging Punjab not to interfere with dam operations. Advocate general of Haryana Pravindra Singh Chauhan reiterated the need for the water release, citing decisions taken by BBMB between April 23 and April 30.
While acknowledging that courts lack technical expertise in water-sharing matters, the bench referred to Article 262 of the Constitution and the Punjab Reorganization Act, which empower the central government to resolve inter-state water disputes. It emphasized that Punjab may extend security to the dam and BBMB staff as per law, but must not interfere with its functioning.
The court also clarified that if Punjab disagrees with BBMB's decisions, it may seek remedy through the appropriate rules laid down under the 1974 framework governing such matters.
It outlined a legal recourse for Punjab, stating, 'In case the State of Punjab is not agreeable to any decision taken by the Bhakra Beas Management Board, then it is free to invoke Explanation-II to Rule 7 of the 1974 Rules by making a representation to the Central Government through the Chairman of the BBMB, which if made, shall be decided by the Central Government, expeditiously.'
The ruling leaves open the suggestion by Satyapal Jain to deploy paramilitary forces for the dam's security, a matter to be considered by BBMB and the Central Government.