Following Supreme Court’s verdict that it is unconstitutional for Punjab to terminate water sharing agreement with other states, Congress president Amarinder Singh on Thursday resigned from his Lok Sabha seat while his party MLAs resigned en-masse from the state assembly.
While the judgement was highly welcomed by Haryana Chief Minister Manohar Lal Khattar, the SAD-BJP termed it as “injustice” to the people of Punjab.
Here is everything that you need to know about the decade old controversy:
Why did the controversy begin and why?
Satluj Yamuna Link Canal (SARYU) is a proposed 214-kilometer long canal connecting Sutlej and Yamuna rivers. It was planned in 1966 after the state of Haryana was formed out of Punjab. Even though, the decision on sharing of resources between the states was taken, the terms on river water (Ravi and Beas rivers) sharing was left undecided.
In 1976 the Centre issued a notification mentioning that both the states will receive 3.5 million acre feet of water each. In 1978 SAD (Shiromani Akali Dal) government signed a deal of Rs 3 crores and passed the deal.
However, Punjab refused to comply saying its agriculture production will suffer a loss as a part of the canal has not been constructed, though Haryana has done its bit. Owing to Punjab's inaction in 1979 Haryana approached the Supreme Court to implement this allocation.
The construction of the canal was suspended in 1990s due to the spreading of militancy in the area. In 2002, the Supreme Court directed Punjab to continue digging the project, however, in 2003, Punjab sought to be discharged from this obligation.
In 2004 the Punjab State Legislature brought the Punjab Termination Agreement Act scrapping all water-sharing agreements with neighbouring states. A Presidential Reference to the Supreme Court with regard to the same was made in 2004 and in 2016, the Supreme Court took up the same for hearing.
In 2016, Punjab assembly also sought to pass a Bill to effect restoration of land acquired for the canal link to the farmers free of cost, to which Supreme Court complied and ordered to pass the Bill.
So why did Punjab stop its work on the canal?
In 1985, the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and Akali Dal president Harchand Singh Longowal signed the Punjab Accord—an agreement signifying that a tribunal would accept the claims of both Punjab and Haryana on sharing of the river waters. Moreover, Eradi tribunal headed by Supreme Court Justice V Balakrishna Eradi in 1987 recommended an increase in the shares of Punjab and Haryana to 5 MAF (million acre feet) and 3.83 MAF respectively, while taking into account the surplus water at base stations that is utilisable.
Since Punjab was caught up in militancy turmoil and several Akai leaders were against the deal, the tribunal’s decision could not be implemented. Longowal was assassinated in less than a month of signing the accord.
In 1985, after Punjab was coming out two years of President’s Rule, then Chief Minister Surjit Singh Barnala re-began building of the canal. However, even though 90% of the work was completed, several opposition parties caused hindrance at the final stage, often turning violent.
More than 30 labourers working at a project site in Chandigarh had been killed. In 1990, speculations arose that a chief engineer of the project and his assistant were killed by militants. Citing to such violent turmoil, Punjab had to halt its construction.
How did Haryana react to it?
In 1990, Haryana took the matter up with the Centre and asked for stringent laws that would enable the construction to be executed by a central agency. After its effort went to vain, the matter was upheld by the Supreme Court in 1996, who sought Punjab to complete the work in its territory. However, on July 12, 2004, Amarinder Singh-led government terminated the water sharing agreement.
What is the final verdict?
On March, 2016, Supreme Court started its hearings into a presidential reference to decide on the legality of the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004, after Punjab decided to dishonour the agreement. As the hearings preceded, the Solicitor General, representing the Centre’s stance, supported Haryana and asked Punjab to resume work.
Amarinder Singh launched an attack on the ruling Shiromani Akali Dal, partner of BJP, and announced a march to protect Punjab’s waters. When Congress moved an adjournment motion on the issue, Punjab Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal moved a resolution saying "not a drop of water" will be allowed to be taken out of the state.
Supreme Court on Thursday said the legislation passed by the Punjab government is 'null and void' in the issue. The Centre will now take over the canal and continue building it.
The Centre had said that it was having a neutral stand in the matter in which the court has recorded the stand of Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh, Delhi and Jammu and Kashmir.
