This Article is From Oct 14, 2022

No Consensus Between Punjab, Haryana Over Sutlej Yamuna Link Canal Issue

Though Bhagwant Mann called Haryana Punjab's "younger brother", he said his state does not have any water to share with the neighbouring state and the question of constructing the canal does not arise.

No Consensus Between Punjab, Haryana Over Sutlej Yamuna Link Canal Issue

"No consensus was arrived at in the meeting," Manohar Lal Khattar told reporters.

Chandigarh:

Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann and his Haryana counterpart Manohar Lal Khattar failed to reach an agreement on the contentious Sutlej Yamuna Link canal during a meeting here today.

Though Bhagwant Mann called Haryana Punjab's "younger brother", he said his state does not have any water to share with the neighbouring state and the question of constructing the canal does not arise.

He said in case Haryana faces shortage of water, both Punjab and that state can approach Prime Minister Narendra Modi and request him to arrange water from either Yamuna or Ganga or anywhere else.

During the meeting at Haryana Niwas here, he also sought reassessment of water from the rivers.

On the other hand, Manohar Lal Khattar said Punjab did not agree on the construction of the SYL canal in its territory.

"No consensus was arrived at in the meeting," he told reporters.

He said Punjab wanted to raise the issue of river water first, but Haryana wanted to discuss the construction of the canal according to the directions of the Supreme Court.

He said his government will apprise Union Jal Shakti Minister Gajendra Singh Shekhawat of the meeting.

Last month, the Supreme Court had nudged the two chief ministers to meet and work out an amicable solution to the SYL canal row, which has been a bone of contention between the two states for several decades.

Punjab has been maintaining that the quantum of water flowing through Ravi and Beas rivers had come down considerably, and therefore, it was seeking reassessment of the water's volume.

Haryana has been seeking completion of the canal to get its share of 3.5 million acre feet of the water, and also that Punjab should comply with the 2002 and 2004 Supreme Court orders for the completion of the canal.

Currently, the state is getting 1.62 million acre feet (MAF) of the Ravi-Beas water.

Addressing the media after the meeting, Mann said he had done his homework on the SYL issue and stressed that he represented Punjab's side strongly.

He pointed out that Haryana at present was getting 14.10 million acre feet of water, more than Punjab.

According to Mann, his state gets 4.22 MAF water from Ravi and Beas, while Haryana receives 3.50 MAF water, whereas from Sutlej, Punjab gets 8.02 MAF while Haryana receives 4.33 MAF water.

Further, he said Punjab does not get any water from Yamuna while Haryana gets 4.65 MAF water and that it also gets 1.62 MAF water from the Sharda Yamuna link.

"In all, Punjab gets 12.24 MAF water while Haryana gets 14.10 MAF water," the Punjab chief minister claimed.

"Haryana asked us to begin constructing the canal in Punjab. We said when we do not have water, why build the canal?" Mann said. "We treat Haryana as our younger brother. But if we do not have something, how can we give it?" He also sought to target the Shiromani Akali Dal and the Congress over the SYL issue.

The Centre had on September 6 informed the Supreme Court that the Punjab government was "not cooperating" in resolving the dispute.

Then Attorney General K K Venugopal, appearing for the Centre, had told the bench that the top court had in 2017 called for an amicable settlement and that it was trying to bring the two states on the same page through its Water Resources Ministry.

"Unfortunately, Punjab has not been cooperating," the top law officer had said.

However, the counsel for Punjab had last month told a bench headed by Justice S K Kaul that the state government was very keen to resolve the issue amicably.

The Punjab Assembly in July 2004 had enacted the Punjab Termination of Agreement Act, annulling all inter-state agreements signed by the state relating to the sharing of water from Ravi and Beas.

However, a constitutional bench of the Supreme Court, while answering the Presidential Reference on November 11, 2016, had held that the act was unconstitutional.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

.