Illusion of surplus Ravi-Beas waters

History gets distorted when it is not explained in the right perspective and factually. Since November, 1954, when the Government of India called upon irrigation engineers of the then joint Punjab to  devise  plans to utilise the surplus waters  of Ravi and  Beas, much water has flown down both the rivers. The engineers of joint Punjab could work out plans to utilise only 7.25 out of 15.85 MAF surplus waters of both the perennial rivers flowing down to Pakistan, keeping in view the prevailing cropping pattern. In a meeting held on January 29, 1955, convened by Gulzari Lal Nanda, the then Union Water Resources Minister, and attended by Irrigation Minister, Punjab, Chaudhary Lahiri Singh from Sonepat, the Centre allocated 7.20 MAF water to Punjab as per the plan presented before them. Rajasthan was allocated 8 MAF and 0.65 MAF was given to Jammu and Kashmir. Unfortunately, the written plan put up by joint Punjab before the Centre showed only 0.62 MAF water shall be utilised in present-day Haryana area through the Hansi Canal (0.32 MAF) and through the Bhakra Canal (0.30 MAF). Rest of the  6.63 MAF surplus water and the pre-Partition usage of 1.98 MAF was proposed for utilisation in present-day Punjab as follows: Upper Bari Doab Canal (3.17), Shah Nehar (0.79), Bet Area of Ravi Beas (0.23), Sirhind Feeder (2.79), Eastern Canal (0.71),  Chakandher Tract (0.24), PEPSU area through Bhakra Canal (0.68). 

Advertisement

In case Chaudhary Lahiri Singh, the illustrious son of Haryana, had shown the need and capacity of south-east Punjab (now Haryana) to utilise 3.50 MAF water, as is now  being demanded, the Centre would have allotted 10.70 MAF water to joint Punjab, instead of 7.20 MAF,. Rajasthan was not interested in utilising surplus water but was forced to utilise the balance surplus of 8.00 MAF  to justify before the World Bank team that India could utilise the entire surplus water of the three eastern rivers. With the allocation of surplus Ravi-Beas water by the Centre as per proceedings of the meeting of January 1955, the World Bank was satisfied about India’s claim on three eastern rivers. Haryana, the reorganised state, got dissatisfied over the internal distribution of this surplus water.  It got allocated 3.50 MAF water as per December 1981 agreement, instead of the 0.62 MAF approved by GOI in 1955. Incidentally, the Malwa region of present Punjab constituting 65 per cent area which got only 0.60 MAF water by the 1955 order of the Centre is still getting only that quantity. Not even a drop of more water was allocated to it after 1955. Malwa is the worst sufferer of depletion of ground water table. 

As per the provision of section 78 of the Punjab Reorganisation Act 1966, Haryana is to get the water of  Beas as per the “Purpose of project”. The “Purpose of project” mentioned in Beas project report clearly stipulates that Haryana areas will get only 0.90 MAF water. As against this, Haryana is actually utilising 1.62 MAF water against the spare capacity available in the Bhakra Main Line Canal. Reasons of discontent of Haryana were political rather than logical. 

Like division of assets in an agrarian feudal family where at the time of partition everything has to be divided equally, Haryana insisted on equal division of river waters, oblivious of laws of nature which determine the flow and use of river waters on a riparian basis and not on the whims of partisan elders to support the younger son. C.B. Singh Sheoran, former Chief Engineer of Haryana tells us () that Punjab may not be aware that Himachal is an upper riparian state and what will Punjab do if it starts dictating terms. Punjab knows that not only is Himachal an upper riparian state to Sutlej, Beas and Ravi rivers but Jammu & Kashmir is an upper riparian state of river Ravi. It is clearly known that Punjab is a lower riparian state of all the three rivers and Haryana and Rajasthan do not even fall in the distant definition of riparian states. The author obliquely admits this. Punjab's political leadership has declared that the state will not share even a drop of water, because Punjab has none to spare.  

The rain and ice flakes falling outside Punjab constitute rivers which flow through the territory of Punjab. Not even a drop of such water flows through the territory of Haryana. Punjab has prior right of usage of such water, along with other riparian states (HP and J&K). The allocation of 4.65 MAF of Yamuna waters to Haryana as a result of the agreement amongst five states is a reality and not an illusion. Punjab has time and again stressed upon the need to build storages/dams for full utilisation of the allocated Yamuna waters. Instead of spending a huge sum of money over the construction of the SYL Canal, for long-distance transfer of Ravi-Beas waters to the Yamuna basin of Haryana, which would cause disruption of water already being used by Punjab farmers in Ravi-Beas areas, the amount should be spent on constructing storage dams on the Yamuna. This would adequately fulfil the requirement of Haryana. The position that Yamuna water allocations to Haryana should have no bearing on the distribution of Ravi-Beas waters, is self-defeating. Why should Yamuna waters which formed an asset of joint Punjab before reorganisation, be earmarked for the exclusive usage of Haryana, when Haryana has been entitling itself to waters of Ravi-Beas on an equal footing with Punjab.

It is wrong to say that Punjab farmers prefer tubewells than canals for  irrigation. River water allocations to Punjab, out of the total availability of water in the three rivers (34.34 MAF), is only 14.22 MAF — including protected pre-Partition utilisation of 4.55 MAF of Sutlej waters, 1.48 MAF of Ravi waters and 0.50MAF of Beas waters. Due to the meagre allocation of river waters, agriculture in Punjab, perforce, became dependent upon tube well irrigation.  Not only in Punjab, but also in other states including Haryana, water requirement is comparatively higher during paddy plantation. It is  wrong that only a nominal quantum of water is needed thereafter.

It is an established fact that the quantum of surplus Ravi-Beas waters has decreased to 13.38 MAF based on 1981-2013 flow series instead of 17.17 MAF as estimated earlier. Punjab had, as far back as 2003, requested the Centre, as per provisions of the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956, to constitute a tribunal for reallocation of waters. On a pro rata basis applied to available water as per 1981 agreement, for argument’s sake, Haryana’s share works  out as 2.95 MAF, instead of 3.50 MAF. After taking into account the existing utilisation of 1.62 MAF through the existing BML Canal by Haryana, the dispute has been relegated to 1.33 MAF water. By the Yamuna agreement of 1994, Haryana is to get 2.01 MAF additional water from Yamuna, over and above the usage of 2.64 MAF at the time of reorganisation of Punjab in 1966. This means Haryana will end up getting 30 per cent more water from Yamuna, than its demand from Punjab. 

The Haryana viewpoint that Punjab farmers are happier pressing the button of tubewell than waiting for the wari (turn) of canal supply and that Punjab canals even do not have proper water course to supply water to farms, is not only wrong reading of situational position but also smacks of disdain towards Punjab farmers. Hence, Haryana should invest financially and politically to utilise 2.01 MAF of Yamuna waters rather than looking at 1.33 MAF of illusionary water from Ravi-Beas. 

The writer, an IAS officer, is the acting Vice Chancellor of the IK Gujral Punjab Technical University, Jalandhar