Chandigarh, March 29
In a move that will further strain the fragile inter-state relations and is likely to stoke political embers, Punjab Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal today said his government would challenge the Punjab Re-organisation Act, 1966.
This, in the first place, allows the sharing of the river waters with neighbouring states.
If Badal carries out his threat, it will be his second such attempt to challenge a specific section of the reorganisation act before the Supreme Court to correct what is termed by a section of the people as a “historical wrong” committed against the state.
Virtually replaying events of the 1970s in Punjab, Badal made an announcement in the Punjab Vidhan Sabha this morning that he had asked his advocate-general to challenge section 78 of the act.
He also said that the AG had been asked to examine the legal validity of the Rajiv-Longowal accord, especially as it stood violated by the then Congress government at the centre. Chandigarh was not transferred to Punjab on the promised date, January 26, 1986, he added.
If Badal challenges the reorganisation act, it will be his second shot at this. In 1979, in his capacity as the Chief Minister, he had challenged sections 78 to 80 of the reorganisation act and also the award of river waters announced by Indira Gandhi in 1976. This application was, however, withdrawn from the apex court in 1982 by the next Congress government that was voted to power in Punjab. The then Chief Minister, Darbara Singh, signed an agreement with the Chief Ministers of Haryana and Rajasthan. Then all three states were Congress ruled and the party was in power at the centre too. This, in Punjab’s political history, is seen as one of the rallying points for militants in Punjab.
Section 78 of the act says: “… all
rights and liabilities of the existing state of Punjab with respect to the Bhakra and Beas projects may be fixed through an agreement by the states after consultation with the central government. If no such agreement is entered into within two years of the appointed day, the central government may, by order, determine the purpose of the projects….” In other words, the central government kept powers with itself to decide the sharing of waters of Punjab and make allocation of the same to other states.
It will be challenged in court as to how how Haryana was made a riparian state and Rajasthan, which does not even come into the picture, was also getting a share of the waters, said an official while explaining matters. Constitutional experts have made it clear that Punjab can challenge the act again. The fact that Darbara Singh withdrew the application cannot be used as a means to deny justice.
Punjab’s opinion is that section 78 is wrongly added to the reorganisation act of 1966. The same was “lifted” from the act that was drafted at the time of the reorganisation of southern states in 1956. All southern states were riparian. Hence, these had rights over river waters. However, in the case of Haryana and Rajasthan this clause could not have applied as both states are not riparian, say Badal’s core team of advisers.
Interestingly, the plea of the Indian government before the Indus Water Commission in 1955 was that water was needed for north-western Rajasthan (Ganganagar, Bikaner and Suratgarh).
Hence, it should be allocated to India. The commission, which was deciding the sharing of river waters between India and Pakistan, finally allocated the rivers, the Ravi, the Beas and the Satluj, for complete use by India.
Badal’s core team has also advised him that even if section 5 of the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004, is scrapped, the water will continue to
flow. Hence, the reorganisation act has to be questioned.
