Punjab moves High Court against BBMB for ‘illegal’ water allocation to Haryana

Alleging “jurisdictional overreach” and violation of established water-sharing norms, the State of Punjab has moved the Punjab and Haryana High Court seeking to quash Bhakra Beas Management Board’s actions of allegedly allowing “illegal” water allocation to Haryana beyond its agreed share.

“The present writ petition has been filed by the State of Punjab challenging the jurisdictional overreach and arbitrary actions of BBMB, particularly in relation to the illegal allocation of water from Bhakra Nangal Dam to the State of Haryana beyond its agreed share,” the petition said.

An advance copy of the petition filed against the BBMB, its Chairman and the Union of India, has been forwarded to the respondents. The petition is yet to come up for hearing. Among other things, it prayed for appointment of a neutral and an impartial chairman through a process involving all partner states.

It said: “Despite exhausting its share, BBMB allowed Haryana to receive 8500 cusecs of water daily, without any legal authority or consent from Punjab”.

The petition asserted that the BBMB was constituted under Section 79 of the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966, for operation and maintenance of water and power infrastructure and to regulate supply of water strictly in accordance with agreement among the partner States.

“Punjab had repeatedly raised objections to overdraws by Haryana and Rajasthan, which were disregarded. BBMB’s actions were based on an unrecognized technical committee meeting and later Board meetings convened in clear violation of BBMB’s own rules. The matter was referred to the Union Power Ministry under Rule 7 of the BBMB Rules, but BBMB unlawfully continued holding meetings and making decisions even after such reference,” the petition read.

The State added BBMB’s actions were without jurisdiction as it lacked authority to alter inter-state water shares, which was the exclusive domain of a tribunal under the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956. “The BBMB is only empowered to regulate supply as per existing agreements, not to unilaterally allocate excess water. No indent was placed by the competent authority (Executive Engineer, BML, Patiala) for the additional water, violating operational rules,” it added.

The petition added the Board meetings held on April 30 and May 3 were convened in contravention of BBMB Regulations as minimum notice period of seven days for urgent meetings and circulation of agenda 12 days in advance were not adhered to. Elaborating, it said in April 30 meeting decision was taken “by the majority to release 8500 cusecs to Haryana”

“The decision by the Union Home Secretary dated May 2 directing release of water to Haryana was taken independently based on one-sided inputs from BBMB, and not on proper adjudication.