09-05-2025
Punjab-Haryana water crisis: Cooperation is needed before the wells run dry
Written by Neeraj Singh Manhas
The Punjab-Haryana water conflict has pushed the region into a crisis, endangering agriculture, livelihoods, and interstate peace. Haryana wants 8,500 cubic feet per second (cusecs) to satisfy drinking water and irrigation requirements in districts including Hisar and Sirsa; Punjab, on the other hand, with very low reservoirs, has reduced supply to 4,000 cusecs to safeguard its agricultural sector.
The dispute highlights not only a fight over water but also a fundamental failure of sustainable resource management. Punjab's groundwater running at extraction is at a critical 165 per cent of its sustainable limit. It means that the state is withdrawing far more water than can be naturally replenished. On the other side, Haryana is struggling with severe shortages. Rooted in past treaties and aggravated by environmental deterioration, this problem calls for cooperative government, agricultural change, and creative water policies to guarantee a robust future for both states.
Three major factors — the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty, the 1966 state reorganisation, which carved Haryana out of Punjab, and the required water-sharing under the Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB) — shape the long-standing conflict. During the depletion period (September 21, 2024 to May 20, 2025), Haryana is entitled to 2.987 million acre-feet (MAF) yearly. Punjab, however, says that Haryana has already used 103 per cent of its share (3.110 MAF) by April 2025. A 23.6 per cent snowfall shortage in 2024–25 and a poor 2024 monsoon have left Punjab's reservoirs, Pong and Ranjit Sagar, nearly depleted, leaving Bhakra as the main surplus source.
Punjab contends this water is essential for its paddy fields, which need 5,337 litres per kilogramme of rice and help India's food security. Haryana, on the other hand, has a drinking water problem since only 60 per cent of its needs are satisfied, which affects rural areas, as well as its supply to Delhi. But the main question is: Will both states give priority to mutual survival above inflexible stances and acknowledge their common vulnerability to climate-driven scarcity?
The history of water-sharing disputes between Indian states has been fraught with challenges. However, during the Green Revolution of the 1960s, Punjab and Haryana emerged as India's breadbasket. However, excessive groundwater pumping seems to threaten Punjab's shallow aquifers by 2029 and deeper ones by 2039. In Haryana, subsidised electricity for tubewells is increasing the number of 'black blocks', where extraction exceeds recharge. Inefficient irrigation and both states' reliance on water-intensive paddy crops further deplete resources.
Solutions include Punjab's 'Pani Bachao, Paisa Kamao' programme, which reduced water use by 30 per cent in pilot projects; and Haryana's adoption of micro-irrigation technologies. Scaling these initiatives, alongside ensuring minimum support prices (MSP) for crops like maize, pulses, and oilseeds, could alleviate pressure. Weak procurement systems have forced Punjab farmers to sell maize at Rs 800-900 per quintal, far below the MSP of Rs 1,850.
However, political discourse has widened the gap. While Punjab's CM Bhagwant Mann contends that Haryana's requests endanger Punjab's agricultural industry, his counterpart in Haryana, Nayab Singh Saini, warns that unutilised Bhakra water runs the risk of leaking to Pakistan. Though election posturing sometimes overshadows answers, both states have conducted all-party discussions, and Punjab held a special Assembly session. Real-time data could help a collaborative water management task force, comprising specialists and farmers under the Bhakra Beas Management Board, and allocate resources. Punjab may let water flow during Haryana's drinking water shortages; Haryana would then return the favour during Punjab's planting season. BBMB has requested the involvement of the Centre. Former Haryana CM Bhupinder Singh Hooda's plea for conversation underlines the need for collaboration. Would these political leaders give long-term resilience top priority over short-term profits?
Also, the recharging of groundwater is absolutely vital. Restoring 79 abandoned canals and 1,600 km of channels at a cost of Rs 4,000 crore, Punjab has increased canal water utilisation by 12-13 per cent. Haryana, like Uttar Pradesh's Jakhni village, should use the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee (MGNREGA) for rainwater collecting and put money towards watershed improvement and check dams. However, public initiatives with the Ministry of Jal Shakti and the non-state actors could help to destigmatise the shift from paddy by promoting these activities. Such initiatives, together with community-driven recharge projects, might restore confidence and resources.
Another project, the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) Canal, remains a flashpoint for both the states. Punjab's fears of resource depletion are valid, but Haryana's legal entitlement is clear. A phased approach, starting with partial transfers and joint monitoring, could break the deadlock. Also, for the long term, there is a need to adopt the Nature-based Solutions (NbS), and integrated water resource management, as seen in the 'Atal Bhujal Yojana'. Watershed restoration and ecological flows in dam operations could benefit both states. India's per capita water availability is projected to fall to 1,341 cubic meters by 2025. It is below the threshold of water scarcity. Given the challenges of climate change, the Punjab-Haryana water crisis is a national warning for all Indians.
Can Punjab and Haryana transform this conflict into an opportunity for resilience? A joint task force, crop diversification, groundwater recharge, and compromise on SYL could ensure equitable water sharing and sustainability. The challenge is whether political will and collective action can triumph over division, setting a precedent for India's water-scarce future. Both states must act before the wells run dry.
The author is Special Advisor for South Asia at the Parley Policy Initiative, Republic of Korea. He is a regular commentator on the issues of Water Security and the Transboundary River issues in India and South Asia. Views expressed are personal
