SC rejects Punjab’s plea for hearing SYL case after polls

R Sedhuraman

Legal Correspondent

New Delhi, January 18

The Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected Punjab’s plea for adjourning the hearing over the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) canal dispute till the new government assumed office in the state.

(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)

While polling is slated for February 4, counting of votes will take place only on March 11 along with other states facing assembly elections – Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Goa and Manipur.

The apex court posted the hearing for February 15.

A bench comprising Justices PC Ghose and Amitava Roy granted three weeks’ time to Punjab for responding to Haryana’s plea for executing apex court’s 2004 directive for completion of the SYL canal. It asked Haryana to file its reply in one week thereafter.

Arguing for Punjab, senior counsel Ram Jethmalani pleaded that the Centre should show statesmanship and resolve the dispute over sharing the waters of Ravi and Beas rivers, instead of letting the two states fight a legal battle.

The bench, however, clarified that there was no way Punjab could shirk its responsibility as the apex court would ensure implementation of its orders for completing the construction of the SYL canal, which would enable Haryana to draw its share of Ravi and Beas waters.

Appearing for the Centre, Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar said the apex court’s decrees could be executed only if the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act-2004 was struck down by the SC.

A five-member Constitution Bench has held the Act invalid while answering the Presidential reference on the issue on November 10, 2016, but this ruling was only advisory in nature, he pleaded.

The bench also asked Haryana as to why it had not challenged Punjab government’s notification returning the farmers land acquired for the SYL canal. Senior counsel Jagdeep Dhankar contended that the state’s plea for execution of the decree automatically covered this aspect also.

Rejecting Punjab’s plea for post-poll hearing, the bench pointed out that the apex court had already ruled that change of governments was irrelevant to hearing cases pending with it.

The Centre said its response to Haryana’s application was ready and this would be filed later this week.

The bench said its November 30, 2016 order for maintaining status quo on the SYL land would continue and this would be ensured by the three court receivers – Union Home Secretary and Punjab’s Chief Secretary and Director General of Police.

In his status report, the Union Home Secretary said a team of officials visited 10 sites along the SYL in Punjab and found no fresh or deliberate damage to the canal. The other two receivers, Punjab police chief and Chief Secretary, have submitted their reports in sealed covers.

Haryana filed the SYL plea after the Punjab government returned the acquired land to the farmers through a notification issued on November 16, 2016 on the strength of a resolution passed in the Assembly and a Cabinet decision.

Haryana has questioned the validity of the November 16 notification ignoring the judgment by a 5-member Constitution Bench on November 10 holding that Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004, was in violation of the Constitution, the Inter-State Water Disputes Act 1956 and the Punjab Reorganisation Act 1966, besides being against two apex court judgments delivered on January 15, 2002 and June 4, 2004.

After the November 10 SC ruling, the Punjab government de-notified about 5,000 acres of land acquired for the canal while the state assembly adopted a resolution on November 16 for stalling canal work by the Central Public Works Department (CPWD) and for demanding charges for river waters.