By IANS
New Delhi : The Supreme Court Friday asked the Central Water Commission (CWC) to make a technical appraisal of the Haryana government’s demand to perforate the Bhakra canal to feed an irrigation channel.
A bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan and Justice R.V. Raveendran asked the CWC to present to the court its technical appraisal report of Haryana’s plan within four weeks and adjourned the matter for further hearing on Nov 12.
While adjourning the matter till Nov 12, the bench extended its interim order restraining Haryana from perforating the canal.
The bench referred the matter to the CWC taking a cue from the argument of the Punjab government counsel Harish salve who contended that Haryana had taken a unilateral decision to perforate the canal ignoring the interests of other states, including Rajasthan.
Objecting to the plea by Haryana government counsel Shanti Bhushan that the state be allowed to perforate the canal, Salve said that Haryana’s project had neither secured environmental clearance not had it been approved by the CWC.
He said: “Ideally the matter should have been sorted out by the CWC by convening a meeting between the three parties — Haryana, Punjab and Rajasthan.
“Alternatively, the prime minister should call the three chief ministers and sort out the matter.”
Earlier, the bench expressed reservation over Bhushan’s plea to let the state puncture the canal on the condition that it would not draw water from it unless permitted by the court.
“It’s not a question of whether you can draw water or not but whether the canal can be punctured. You can puncture it in three days, but it would take months altogether to reconstruct it,” Justice Raveendran observed.
Haryana is building a 20-km water channel — called the Hansi Branch Butana Branch of the Multipurpose Link Channel — off Bhakra canal to irrigate the state’s farmlands. The state government wants to perforate the Bhakra canal main line near Ajimgarh village in Kaithal district to draw water for the channel.
The channel, running from west to east along the Punjab border, is to have a 10.2-feet-high embankment for its first 11 km, which will taper to a height of seven feet along its subsequent nine km run.
The Punjab government has moved the apex court, challenging Haryana’s irrigation project, contending that the construction of the embankment for the water channel would obstruct the free flow of surface water from north to south and would result in flooding in Punjab.
Punjab has contended that the flooding will result in submergence of 20,756 acres of land in 32 villages and cause the displacement of over 100,000 people in the state.
Punjab has been objecting to Haryana’s project contending that it will ruin the existing irrigation system as well as the communication system in the state and cause other damages.
Punjab has termed the construction of the water channel by Haryana as “violation of its territorial rights” and an “an extra-territorial nuisance”.
Punjab has contended that the farming land which Haryana proposed to irrigate by the channel was not the part of the areas identified for irrigation in the Bhakra Nangal agreement of 1959.
The Rajasthan government has joined the issue in the apex court, objecting to the Haryana government’s plan.
Appearing for Rajasthan, senior Counsel K.K. Venugopal contended that his client state’s share of water to the tune of 0.9 cusec feet has already shrunk to 0.7 cusec feet during the peak agricultural season.
He said that if Haryana was allowed to draw water from the canal after perforating it, Rajasthan’s water share would dwindle further.