SYL land given back to owners can’t be recovered, Punjab tells SC

Satya Prakash

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, February 21

The Punjab government has told the Supreme Court that the land meant for the construction of Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) Canal that was given back to the landowners cannot be recovered.

In an affidavit filed in the top court, the Punjab government said: “...the land in question having been already transferred to the landowners in obedience to the resolution of the legislative assembly dated 16.11.2016, the recovery of said land from the landowners is not possible.”

(Follow ; and )

The Parkash Singh Badal-led SAD-BJP government accused the Centre of abdicating its responsibility, saying it failed to fulfil its mandatory duty to constitute a Water Tribunal for adjudication of the issues raised by Punjab in its January 1, 2003 complaint.

“Union of India is duty bound to play the role of a mediator in inter–state water disputes to uphold the spirit of federalism which is the underpinning principle on which our Constitution is founded. In the present case, the Union of India has not shown any proactive approach in sorting out the water issues between the two neighbouring states,” the affidavit read.

Read:

The affidavit – which will be taken up for hearing on Wednesday by a bench headed by Justice PC Ghosh – stated that “a fuller constitutional solution to the SYL canal is not possible unless the alleged entitlement of the Applicant State of Haryana — a non-riparian state — is resolved in accordance with law having regard to the changed circumstances”.

Interestingly, the Punjab government had on February 16 requested the Supreme Court to hear the SYL canal issue after the announcement of results of Assembly polls on March 11.

But in its rejoinder affidavit filed to counter the Centre’s submissions, the Punjab government requested the top court to direct the Centre to “immediately explore on the transfer of Sarda water to Yamuna under the feasibility report prepared by the National Water Development Agency”.

It said the court should direct the Centre “to create storages over river Yamuna to utilise water which is otherwise going waste and to explore alternate sources for irrigating Yamuna basin areas, by augmenting the Yamuna flows in Haryana, particularly from river Sarda as now planned by the National Water Development Agency (NWDA) – a premier agency of the Union Ministry of Water Resources”.

Appearing for the SAD-BJP government, senior counsel Ram Jethmalani had said: "Please keep it after 11th of March..... Election results are to be announced..."

The bench had wondered what had the court proceedings to do with election results.

Jethmalani had said the Punjab government's affidavit was ready but the Chief Minister was undergoing medical treatment and it would be filed tomorrow after vetting.

The bench had asked the Punjab government to file their affidavit by February 20 and posted the matter for further hearing on February 22.

The top court had in November 2016, declared unconstitutional the law passed by the Punjab Assembly in 2004 to terminate the SYL canal water sharing agreement with neighbouring states.

Holding that the Punjab Termination of Agreement Act, 2004 was not in conformity with the provisions of the Constitution, it had answered in the negative all the four questions referred to it in a Presidential Reference.

A constitution bench had on November 10 ruled that Punjab could not have taken a ‘unilateral’ decision to terminate the agreement with Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan, Jammu and Kashmir, Delhi and Chandigarh on sharing of the Ravi-Beas river waters.

On November 30 last year, the top court had ordered status quo on the land acquired for the construction of canal's stretch in Punjab and appointed the Union home secretary, Punjab's chief secretary and the director general of police as receivers.

However, it had made it clear that the receivers were only for the purposes of submitting a report on the ground situation to the court.

The order had come on Haryana government's plea seeking status quo ante in the wake of Punjab's decision to de-notify the acquired land and restoring it to original owners.

Last week, the top court said the interim order would continue.