New Delhi, India (April 19, 2014): It is learnt that on Tuesday (April 15) the Supreme Court of India (SCI) accepted Haryana government’s plea for an early hearing of its application for vacating the 2007 SC order, restraining it from using the 109-km Hansi-Butana canal.
The canal was built by Haryana to take ‘it’s share of water’ from Bhakhra Main Line (BML) at Samana. Punjab has been objecting to Haryana’s move as the canal and the cemented wall built along side it has threatened large area of Punjab with floods in rainy season as the canal was a major obstruction in the natural flow of water.
As per information a Supreme court bench comprising Justices CK Prasad and PC Ghose posted Haryana’s application for detailed hearing on April 24. It would be taken up as the first item immediately after the court assembles that day.
Arguing for Haryana, senior advocate Vinod Arvind Bobde pleaded for a decision before the beginning of summer as the Centre had alerted all states about a possible drought this year due to the El Nino effect.
According to Haryana [t]he state had already spent Rs 354 crore on the construction of the intra-state canal for effective utilisation of its share of water from the BML.
Senior counsel Rajeev Dhavan and KK Venugopal, appearing for Punjab and Rajasthan, respectively, opposed Haryana’s plea for vacating the SC stay, contending that allowing the plea would amount to disposing of Punjab’s original suit in this regard.
Once Haryana was allowed to use the canal, it would become fait accompli and irreversible and nothing would survive in the 2007 suit against the canal, which would cause floods in Punjab and reduce the flow of water to Rajasthan, they contended.
Punjab and Rajasthan pointed out that the SC had already considered Haryana’s plea on four occasions and decided against vacating the stay, pending disposal of the suit. Further, the process of leading evidence in the suit was nearing completion and as such there was no point in passing another interim order, they pleaded.
“Also, since water disputes always cause a little bit of tension, we request the court not to add to the tension,” they said. Nevertheless, Bobde pleaded that “Haryana wants an order before the summer because of the El Nino alert by the Centre.”
The Bench said since all states had concluded their pleadings on Haryana’s application, it would hear the matter early.
In the event of the apex court not willing to allow Haryana to puncture BML, pending disposal of Punjab’s suit, Haryana has suggested that it be permitted to use draw water either through siphons or pumping without tampering with the BML embankment.
Hansi-Butana canal – Part of Larger Plan:
According to experts on this matter, Hansi-Butana canal was part of a larger plan. In an early interview with the Sikh Siyasat News (SSN), Gurbir Singh Dhillon, former chief engineer of Punjab, had informed that the controversial Satluj Yamuna Link (SYL) canal was to take out 34 LAF river water of Punjab to Haryana. He revealed that Haryana was already getting 18 LAF (out of 34 LAF) through Bhakhra canal. He said that BML had capacity to take out remaining 16 LAF water as well but the capacity of Haryana’s existing canals was exhausted, therefore Hansi-Butana canal was built in order to take out remaining 16 LAF through BML.
It is notable that Punjab water headworks are under indirect control of the central government of India as the Bhakhra-Beas management board is constituted by the centre. The central government of India has no principle objection against loot of Punjab waters by Rajasthan, Haryana and Delhi. Therefore it is reasonable to believe that Hansi-Buntana canal would largely affect Punjab’s interests as it would allow Hayrana to take out more river waters of Punjab, that is already a water deficit state and facing sever water shortage crisis.