Water dispute: HC dismisses Punjab's plea seeking recall or modification of May 6 order
Punjab had sought a recall or modification of the high court's order pertaining to Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan's May 2 decision to release 4,500 cusecs of extra water to Haryana.
The high court had directed Punjab to abide by the decision of the meeting held on May 2 under the chairmanship of the Union Home Secretary.
Punjab had alleged concealment of "material facts" by the Centre, Haryana and the Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB) which led to the May 6 high court order.
In the order that came out on Saturday, the division bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel dismissed the Punjab government's plea.
Referring to the state of Punjab's assertion that disputes relating to water between two or more states emanate from Article 262 of the Constitution, pursuant to which Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956, the court said, "Merely because this court held that Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966 is a manifestation of Article 262 (1) of the Constitution, does not help the stance of State of Punjab in any manner in its attempt to seek re-calling/ modification of the order, unless the State of Punjab can show that because of this error, any prejudice has been caused to it, which is certainly not the case herein."
The major thrust of Punjab's argument is as regards material concealment on the part of BBMB and Haryana by contending that the April 29 letter of Haryana, requesting the BBMB Chairman to refer the matter to the Centre was not brought to the notice of the court.
"Taking up the ground of non-disclosure of the letter, it is obvious from reading of the said letter that the extraordinary meeting of the BBMB dated April 28 was held to execute the resolution dated April 23 of the Technical Committee of BBMB. However, this letter clearly reveals that the State of Haryana was aggrieved by non-execution of resolution of BBMB, especially regarding release of 8500 cusecs of water to Haryana.
"Contents of letter April 29 further elicit that stance taken therein was that the BBMB was being monopolised by Punjab. Thus, the State of Haryana under Explanation - II to Rule 7 of 1974 Rules, requested the Chairman of the BBMB to refer the matter to Centre for implementation of earlier resolution," said the order.
A close scrutiny of Rule 7 of 1974 Rules, along with both the explanations, reveals that in case of difference of opinion among the members on any question of policy or the rights of any of the participating states, the chairman shall refer the matter to the central government, which shall decide the same, it said.
The court further stated that the April 29 letter does not relate to any dissent by Haryana but contains a request to the BBMB Chairman to refer the matter to the central government for the execution of the minutes of the April 28 meeting.
Thus, in essence, the letter dated April 29 does not raise any dispute or difference of opinion of Haryana but merely seeks implementation of the April 28 resolution of the Technical Committee of the Board. As such, this letter cannot be treated as a reference to the Centre, the court held.
Consequently, the April 29 letter of Haryana does not fall within the realm of "material fact", non-disclosure of which is hence inconsequential, it said.
Regarding the ground of BBMB being incompetent to decide the issue once the matter was referred to the government of India is concerned, the order said since this court has held the April 29 letter not to be a reference to the government of India, the question of reference being pending with the government of India does not arise and, thus, BBMB was free to act in accordance with law.
Referring to its May 6 order, the court mentioned that it disposed of the matter in the backdrop of an emergent situation that had arisen and any delay in resolving the dispute would have caused irreparable damage to millions of residents of different states, including Haryana, Rajasthan and Delhi.
On May 20, Haryana, BBMB and the Centre had filed their replies to Punjab's plea which sought a review or modification of the high court's May 6 order.
Haryana had earlier submitted that the application filed by Punjab is "complete abuse of the process of the court with an ulterior motive to wriggle out from the proceedings of contempt."
Punjab and Haryana had been at loggerheads over the distribution of water with the AAP government refusing to share water from Bhakra Dam, saying the neighbouring State has already utilised its share of water.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
44 minutes ago
- Time of India
Gutkha Ban Vs Tasmac Sales: Contradiction in Tamil Nadu's Public Health Policy
Srimathi Venkatachari In Tamil Nadu, public health policy treads a morally ambiguous line between constitutional commitment and commercial convenience. The state, invoking Article 47 of the Constitution—mandating the govt to improve nutrition and public health and prohibit intoxicating substances — has banned gutka and pan masala citing cancer risks. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now At the same time, it operates and profits from the largest govt-run liquor retail monopoly in India: Tasmac. With more than `44,000 crore in annual revenue, the contradiction is not just glaring —it's institutional. This paradox reveals a deeper policy schizophrenia. On the one hand, the govt frames itself as a paternalistic guardian, shielding citizens from harmful substances. On the other, it plays bartender to the masses, peddling alcohol from every street corner, including those adjacent to schools, temples, and homes. The result is a public health framework that outlaws cancer but subsidizes cirrhosis. The 2013 ban on chewable tobacco was enforced under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, a legislative tool designed to protect citizens from hazardous food items. The move received judicial backing. In Godawat Pan Masala Products Co. vs Union of India, the Supreme Court recognised the States' autonomy under the Food Safety law to restrict or ban harmful substances. Madras High Court, in Rathinam Enterprises vs State of Tamil Nadu, (2025) went further, approving the selective ban on processed tobacco while permitting the sale of raw tobacco leaves. Contrast this with the legal regime for alcohol. Here, Tamil Nadu enjoys a golden goose thanks to Entry 8 of the state list in the Constitution. It grants states the sole authority to regulate alcohol production, distribution and sale. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now As a result, the same govt that brands gutka a public enemy becomes a benevolent supplier of alcohol. Public health, in this calculus, bends easily to revenue imperatives. Legally, the state walks a careful line, but the cracks are evident. In state of Tamil Nadu vs K Balu (2017) the Supreme Court upheld state-imposed curbs on liquor sales, especially near national highways, affirming the govt's power to regulate in the public interest. Yet, public interest becomes an elastic term when liquor shops mysteriously reappear just meters from their original locations after 'relocation'. Citizens see through this charade. A Tasmac outlet may comply with zoning laws on paper while operating adjacent to residential zones in practice. Alcoholism, domestic violence and road fatalities climb, but liquor counters stay open, often with police protection. The result is what might be termed 'constitutional tokenism': the use of selective bans to appear health-conscious while running a vast, state-sponsored liquor empire. This satisfies constitutional formalities under the doctrine of 'reasonable classification' but fails the test of equity, ethics and lived experience. The social cost of alcohol consumption in Tamil Nadu is immense. Studies link it to rising domestic violence, workplace absenteeism, school dropouts and road accidents. Women's groups routinely protest Tasmac shops that operate in close proximity to homes, citing increased insecurity and disruption of family life. Many of these protests are met with silence or police force. Meanwhile, the fiscal reliance on liquor revenue makes meaningful reform nearly impossible. In some districts, revenue from Tasmac outstrips allocations for education and public health. The irony is cruel: schools go underfunded while liquor outlets enjoy round-the-clock supply chains. What makes this even more concerning is the regressive nature of this taxation. The poorest — daily-wage workers and labourers — spend disproportionately more on alcohol, while the state grows dependent on their addiction to meet budgetary targets. The paradox sharpens further when one looks at class. Elite society indulges alcohol in private clubs and gated communities, often with imported spirits and minimal state scrutiny. For the working class, Tasmac is the only accessible vendor, public, noisy, often unsafe. The state's liquor policy therefore not only sustains addiction, it stratifies it. The poor buy what the state sells; the rich import what the state ignores. There is no easy solution. Prohibition is neither feasible nor desirable, as Gujarat's failed experiment shows. But surely there is a middle path, one that involves decentralising liquor retail, investing in de-addiction centres, raising awareness about substance abuse, and capping the density of outlets in urban and rural areas. Most importantly, the state must confront its moral conflict: it cannot pose as a public health crusader while acting as the chief purveyor of addiction. Tamil Nadu's policymakers must ask themselves a basic question. Should the health of its people depend on the sale of what ails them? (The writer is an advocate in the Madras high court) Email your feedback with name and address to
Time of India
44 minutes ago
- Time of India
Farmers protest in Manapparai over loan denials, water crisis
Trichy: Members of the Desiya Thenninthiya Nadhigal Inaippu Vivasayigal Sangam, led by P Ayyakannu, staged a protest at the Manapparai bus stand on Sunday, raising key demands related to farm distress, water scarcity, and agricultural loan policies. The protesters said cooperative banks were denying fresh crop loans on the grounds of low CIBIL scores, even to those who had repaid previous loans. They demanded exemption from CIBIL score criteria for agricultural loans and called for fresh loans to be issued within a week of repayment. Highlighting rising input costs, farmers sought an increase in crop loan limits and criticised the Centre for failing to deliver on the promise of Minimum Support Price (MSP) at twice the input cost. They also questioned why farm loans are not waived while public sector banks have written off loans in other sectors between FY16 and FY25. Their other demands included interlinking of southern rivers, water supply from Mettur or Aliyar dam to the Ponnani River and Kannoothu dam, a monthly pension of ₹5,000 for farmers, round-the-clock three-phase electricity, and installation of CCTV cameras along the national highway to curb theft. Carrying placards, the protesters urged the government to act immediately to safeguard farmers' lives and livelihoods.
Deccan Herald
an hour ago
- Deccan Herald
Those who don't understand Constitution criticise it: Kharge
Vijayapura: Some people who don't even understand the Constitution criticise it. Without the Constitution, we wouldn't have had freedom, equality, education, and voting rights for women. Because of the Constitution, people in this country have strength. For citizens to live in peace, happiness, and harmony, the Constitution is essential, said AICC president Mallikarjun was speaking at the remembrance programme of Fa Gu Halakatti, Banthanal Sanganabasava Shivayogi, B M Patil and Bangaramma Sajjan, who were instrumental in establishing and developing the BLDE institution, here on Sunday.'Some people say the individual comes first, and then the nation. I don't know how such thoughts struck their minds. If the nation survives, then everyone survives. So, we should understand that the nation comes first,' he said, in a veiled attack on Prime Minister Narendra about the caste census in the country, Kharge said those who have benefited from various facilities say it is not necessary. But those who are deprived of these benefits insist that a caste census should be done. Caste census is essential to bring equality in society and to provide opportunities to the underprivileged, he emphasised.'No regrets''I fought as the Leader of the Opposition in 1999 and worked hard to bring the party to power. But S M Krishna became the chief minister. Still, I have no regrets about missing that opportunity,' he said.'I have never chased power. I earned positions through my efforts. From being the Congress President to now holding the AICC post, I have reached this stage. You can't achieve anything if you work with selfish intentions,' he added.'When I was a six-year-old boy, I lost my mother and sister during the Razakar violence. I was raised under the care of my father, said Kharge, turning emotional as he recalled several incidents unfolded in his life.'Dhankhar must reveal'Former vice president Jagdeep Dhankhar himself should reveal the reason behind his sudden resignation, said to questions posed by media persons here on Sunday, he said only Modi and Dhankhar know the real reason for the vice president's resignation. We are not aware of what happened between has always sided with the central government. We were never given a chance to speak about farmers' problems, the plight of the poor or international matters, he expressed we tried to raise issues concerning the poor, it was portrayed as a Hindu-Muslim conflict, he added.
