‘Completion of SYL Canal essential to resolve water dispute between Punjab and Haryana'
What is the current water dispute between Punjab and Haryana?
In April 2025, Haryana reported a sharp decline in its water supply from the Bhakra dam and approached the Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB) to raise its allocation from 4,000 cusecs to 8,500 cusecs. The BBMB's technical committee partially met the demand by approving an additional 4,500 cusecs for eight days. Punjab opposed the decision, claiming Haryana had already used 3.110 million acre-feet (MAF) — 104% of its sanctioned share for the depletion period (September 21, 2024-May 20, 2025). It argued that Bhakra and Pong dam levels were critically low and insisted on capping Haryana's supply at 4,000 cusecs to protect its own agricultural needs.
Haryana countered that water reserves were sufficient and accused Punjab of making false claims. It also pointed out that Punjab had received 22% excess water over the past two decades. As tensions escalated, the BBMB sought intervention from the Central government. The Centre advised Punjab to follow the BBMB recommendation. But the deadlock continues.
What is the significance of the Ravi-Beas water dispute?
This is a long-standing inter-State conflict over the equitable sharing of surplus waters from the rivers. The dispute affects agriculture, drinking water, regional development, and political relations in northern India.
While Haryana cites historical agreements, tribunal rulings, and Supreme Court verdicts to demand its share, Punjab argues it lacks sufficient water due to rising demand and ecological degradation.
What is the legal and historical background?
The roots of the dispute trace back to the post-Independence period. Under the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty, India retained control over the eastern rivers — Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej — while Pakistan received the western rivers. In 1955, 15.85 MAF of Ravi-Beas water was allocated among Punjab (7.2 MAF), Rajasthan (8 MAF), and Jammu & Kashmir (0.65 MAF). After Haryana's creation in 1966, it was granted 3.5 MAF. In 1976, a government order split 7.2 MAF equally between Punjab and Haryana. The 1981 agreement adjusted this, reducing Haryana's share to 45.33% and increasing Punjab's.
To facilitate this allocation, the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) Canal was proposed. The 1985 Punjab Accord reaffirmed both water-sharing and the SYL Canal. The Eradi Tribunal later fixed Haryana's share at 3.83 MAF and Punjab's at 5 MAF, stressing that the SYL Canal was essential for Haryana.
However, Punjab halted canal construction in 1982 under political pressure, and in 2004, it passed legislation terminating all earlier water agreements. The Supreme Court declared this termination unconstitutional, but implementation remains stalled.
What operational challenges does Haryana face in accessing the Ravi-Beas water?
Haryana's key challenge is the non-completion of the SYL Canal. The State relies on the Bhakra Main Line and Narwana Canal — both outdated and suffering from siltation and wear and tear. The Supreme Court directives and tribunal rulings have not been enforced.
As a result, Haryana receives only 1.62 MAF of its 3.5 MAF entitlement, losing 1.88 MAF annually. This water shortfall hits the State's southern districts hard, leaving over 3 lakh hectares of farmland uncultivated and impacting agricultural output .
What is the role of the Bhakra Beas Management Board?
Formed under the Punjab Reorganisation Act of 1966, the BBMB operates under the Ministry of Power. It manages the Bhakra-Nangal and Beas projects — reservoirs, canals, and power stations — and regulates water release based on storage, snowmelt forecasts, and inflow data. The BBMB follows a two-season cycle: depletion period (September 21-May 20) and filling period (May 21-September 20). Monthly technical committee meetings, chaired by the BBMB chairman and attended by State officials, decide allocations based on levels like Bhakra dam's critical 1,506 feet level. Following the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty, the BBMB also plays a strategic role in ensuring surplus water does not flow into Pakistan.
How do you view BBMB's role in the April–May 2025 dispute?
The BBMB's actions were critical but controversial. It cut Haryana's allocation from 8,500 to 4,000 cusecs, citing low reservoir levels, which sparked strong protests from Haryana. The State also highlighted that its representative — Member (Irrigation), Haryana — has not been appointed, weakening its say in the BBMB decisions.
Accusations of bias towards Punjab surfaced, although the BBMB defended its actions as technically sound.
What are the broader implications of the dispute?
The unresolved dispute has significant socio-economic and environmental costs. Farmers in Haryana's Kaithal, Jind, Hisar, Fatehabad, and Sirsa districts face severe irrigation shortages. Punjab fears further losses may worsen its groundwater crisis.
Politically, the issue has polarised both States and escalated public tensions. Environmentally, poor coordination leads to unutilised monsoon water flowing into Pakistan and excessive groundwater extraction on both sides. Governance suffers from institutional gaps, including the BBMB vacancies and outdated tribunal assessments.
What solutions do you propose?
Completion of the SYL Canal is essential. Additionally, alternative water transport systems, irrigation efficiency upgrades, crop diversification, water conservation, and groundwater monitoring must be prioritised. The Centre must facilitate sustained inter-State dialogue and promote confidence-building measures. A long-term political consensus should replace short-term electoral interests.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
SC to take up SIR today: 35 lakh voters untraceable, opposition mounts pressure on govt – controversy explained in 10 points
NEW DELHI: A political and legal battle is underway over the Election Commission's Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar. What was intended as a technical exercise to improve the accuracy of voter lists has escalated into a flashpoint in both Parliament and the Supreme Court, with opposition parties alleging disenfranchisement and voter fraud, while the poll body insists it is a necessary step to uphold electoral integrity. The Supreme Court is set to hear a petition today challenging the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in Bihar, as the Opposition intensifies its attack on the government over the exercise. Led by the Congress, opposition parties have accused the Centre of using the revision process to target voters just months before the state heads to elections. The row over SIR has gained fresh momentum in Parliament as well, with protests disrupting proceedings of the House over the past week. Here is the controversy explained in 10 points: What is the Special Intensive Revision (SIR)? The Election Commission of India (ECI) launched the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in Bihar on June 24. As per the centre, the objective was to update and clean up the electoral roll through house-to-house verification by Booth Level Officers (BLOs). The last such exercise in the state was conducted in 2003. With Bihar undergoing rapid urbanisation, youth enrolment, and internal migration, the ECI said the revision was crucial for ensuring accurate rolls ahead of state elections. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Experts Urge Seniors With Memory Loss To Take This Key Nutrient Daily Memory Health Learn More Undo Why SIR became a flashpoint in Parliament While the Monsoon session was set to debate Operation Sindoor, the SIR exercise quickly became a parallel point of contention. INDIA bloc MPs have submitted multiple notices demanding a discussion on the matter, alleging that the SIR was being used to remove genuine voters from rolls. Parliamentary affairs minister Kiren Rijiju clarified that the Operation Sindoor debate would take priority, pushing SIR-related discussions to a later date — a decision that drew strong reactions from the Opposition. Supreme Court steps in The Supreme Court is hearing a batch of pleas challenging the SIR. Petitioners argue that the exercise lacks legal safeguards and risks disenfranchising large swathes of the population. The lead petitioner, NGO Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), claimed the exercise is "arbitrary" and violates Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. The court has also questioned the exclusion of Aadhaar and ration cards as valid ID for voter verification. Massive participation or mass fraud? According to the EC, the SIR saw over 7.24 crore of Bihar's 7.89 crore electors participate, a turnout rate of nearly 92%. However, multiple affidavits and field reports challenge this figure, suggesting enumeration forms were uploaded en masse by BLOs without voter consent. ADR and other petitioners claimed that even dead people were shown to have submitted forms, raising concerns of systemic fraud to meet internal targets. 35 lakh voters untraceable In its latest press note dated July 27, the Election Commission clarified the status of the 35 lakh voters flagged as missing. According to the ECI, many were found to have moved to other states or union territories, some were deceased, others did not submit their enumeration forms, and a few were simply not willing to register. The Commission emphasised that their exact status will be confirmed only after scrutiny by EROs and AEROs by 1 August. Importantly, all genuine electors can still be added during the claims and objections period starting 1 August. Online, SMS, and volunteer outreach used to reach every voter Over 5.7 crore SMSes were sent to registered mobile numbers, 29 lakh forms were submitted digitally, and BLOs made multiple home visits. Volunteers also assisted senior citizens, PwDs, and vulnerable groups in accessing forms and filing appeals, with training provided for redressal mechanisms. Claims and objections window opens August 1 The EC has said that no name will be deleted without a 'speaking order' and due notice. The draft rolls will be published on August 1, and electors or parties can file claims or objections till September 1. Appeals can be made to the District Magistrate or CEO if needed. EC says all major political parties consulted In a detailed affidavit to the Supreme Court, the ECI defended the SIR as essential for removing ineligible voters and ensuring free and fair elections. Citing Articles 326 and provisions of the Representation of People Act, the Commission insisted it was fulfilling its constitutional duty. EC also claimed all major political parties were consulted and that over 1.5 lakh Booth Level Agents were deployed. However, the ADR contested that no political party had asked for a complete overhaul. From Bihar to the nation: A wider SIR looms In its June 24 directive, the ECI announced that SIR will eventually be conducted nationwide. With 96.88 crore voters in India, even a small error rate could affect millions. ANI said the findings in Bihar have heightened concerns about systemic issues that could emerge in other states, especially where similar migration patterns exist. The draft electoral rolls will be published on August 1, with a window for objections open until September 1. Concerns about due process and transparency Critics say the SIR is being conducted in a way that violates procedural fairness. ADR's affidavit to the court alleged that forms were submitted by BLOs without physical verification, and that there were no proper channels for redress. The EC has argued that appeals can be made under Section 24 of the RP Act, but complainants say awareness and accessibility are limited. With conflicting narratives and high stakes, the SIR has now evolved from a bureaucratic exercise to a national controversy.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Supreme Court to review Delhi's old vehicle ban today: What's the policy and why was it paused?
The Supreme Court will review the controversial ban on older petrol and diesel vehicles in the National Capital Region (NCR) on Monday. The hearing follows a plea by the Delhi government, challenging the blanket ban on diesel vehicles older than 10 years and petrol vehicles older than 15 years, arguing the restrictions lack scientific backing. The Delhi government rolled out the 'No fuel for old vehicles' policy on July 1, but it was paused within two days.(AFP) A bench led by Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran will take up the matter. One of the most pertinent questions to be answered from the hearing is whether Bharat Stage VI (BS-VI) compliant vehicles should still face arbitrary end-of-life restrictions based solely on age. The Delhi government's plea seeks a comprehensive study by the Centre and CAQM to assess the actual environmental benefits of age-based restrictions versus emission-based criteria. What's the ban? The current ban traces back to a 2015 order by the National Green Tribunal (NGT), which prohibited diesel vehicles older than 10 years and Petrol vehicles older than 15 years. "The vehicles which are more than 15 years old will not be permitted to be parked in any public area, and they shall be towed away and challenged by the police in accordance with the law. This direction would be applicable to all vehicles without exception, i.e. two wheelers, three wheelers, four wheelers, light vehicles and heavy vehicles, irrespective of whether commercial or otherwise," the NGT said in its November 26, 2014, order. The Supreme Court upheld this ruling in 2018, citing alarming air pollution levels in Delhi-NCR and a need to protect public health. In line with this, the Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) directed that fuel stations stop supplying petrol and diesel to these "end-of-life" vehicles from July 1, 2025. Why was the policy paused? The Delhi government, under chief minister Rekha Gupta, rolled out the 'No fuel for old vehicles' policy on July 1, 2025, but it was paused within two days after facing public backlash. The government then cited logistical hurdles and infrastructure gaps, especially in identifying and enforcing the ban effectively. Delhi environment minister Manjinder Singh Sirsa said last week that pollution levels of vehicles should be determined based on their usage rather than their age, ahead of the Supreme Court hearing on the End-of-Life (EoL) vehicle policy. "There are many vehicles that have aged, but because they haven't been used much, their pollution levels are lower. There are so many new vehicles whose age is less but have been used a lot; so we believe that the parameter to determine pollution levels must be the use of the vehicle instead of its age," Sirsa told news agency ANI.
Scroll.in
an hour ago
- Scroll.in
Bihar voter roll revision: 91.6% electors submitted forms, 65 lakh names may be removed, says EC
The Election Commission on Sunday said that 91.6% electors in Bihar had submitted their enumeration forms for the special intensive revision of the state's electoral rolls by the end of the first phase of the exercise on Friday. The poll panel said that more than 7.2 crore out of the state's 7.8 crore electors had submitted the forms by the deadline, indicating 'overwhelming participation'. This would mean that the remaining 65 lakh names registered in the July 2025 list may not make it to the draft rolls to be published on August 1. The Election Commission added that 2.8% electors (22 lakh) had died, 4.5% (26 lakh) had permanently shifted and 0.8% persons (7 lakh) were found to be enrolled at more than one place. The exact status of the 65 lakh electors would be known after forms are scrutinised by the electoral registration officers or assistant electoral registration officers by August 1, the statement said. 'However, genuine electors can still be added back in electoral rolls during the Claims and Objection period from 1st August to 1st September 2025,' the poll panel added. It said that the electors found enrolled at multiple places would be retained only at one place. The poll panel said in a statement that efforts were also made to ensure that no migrant worker was left behind. This included advertisements in Hindi published in 246 newspapers and requesting all states and Union Territories to make efforts to reach out to the migrants from Bihar. About 16 lakh migrant workers had filled the enumeration forms online while about 13 lakh had downloaded the forms, it added. The revision of the electoral rolls in Bihar was announced by the Election Commission on June 24. As part of the exercise, persons whose names were not on the 2003 voter list will need to submit proof of eligibility to vote. Voters born before July 1, 1987, must show proof of their date and place of birth, while those born between July 1, 1987, and December 2, 2004, must also submit documents establishing the date and place of birth of one of their parents. Those born after December 2, 2004, will need proof of date of birth for themselves and both parents. If the officers are satisfied with the details provided, the voters will be re-enrolled to a new voter list by the electoral registration officers. If not, they will be removed from the voter lists. A draft roll will be published on August 1 and the final roll will be out on September 30. Bihar is expected to head for Assembly polls in October or November. On July 2, eleven INDIA bloc parties told the Election Commission that the special intensive revision of Bihar's electoral rolls risked disenfranchising several voters, as they may not be able to produce the necessary documents. Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar on July 6 defended the exercise, claiming that the exercise had to be carried out as no one was satisfied with the current voter rolls. On July 10, the Supreme Court urged the Election Commission to consider Aadhaar cards, voter ID cards and ration cards as valid documents for the revision of electoral rolls. However, on July 21, the Election Commission told the court that Aadhaar cards, voter ID cards and ration cards cannot be included as standalone valid documents for the exercise. In a counter-affidavit filed in the court, the poll panel also stated that a person's citizenship will 'not terminate' on being found ineligible for registration in the electoral rolls. The court will hear the matter next on Monday. 'Why a big fuss' On Sunday, the Election Commission reiterated that the draft electoral roll to be published on August 1 was not the final voter list, adding that a month's time would be given to include eligible electors and exclude those ineligible, PTI reported. The poll panel said that it was 'not able to understand' why a 'big fuss' was being created when a month-long period will be available to point out wrongful inclusions and exclusions to the list. Political parties were free to check with their workers on the progress of the process, it said. 'Why not ask their 1.6 lakh booth-level agents to submit claims and objections from August 1 till September 1?' the news agency quoted the commission as saying. Booth-level agents appointed by political parties work with Election Commission officers in preparing or updating the voter list. 'Why are some persons trying to give an impression that the draft list is the final list, which it is not, as per special Intensive revision orders,' the poll panel added.
