Akalis were yet to find the loophole in Section 5 but The Indian Express beat the opposition to it as it brought out the new situation: the new Act actually provided legislative sanction to continuing flow of water to neighbouring states which was earlier only by sufferance.

Experts say Punjab Act dilutes riparian concept

S P Singh

Chandigarh: 

IRONICALLY for Punjab Chief Minister Amarinder Singh, projected across the nation as the villain of the piece but as the toast of his own state, several staunch advocates of the riparian principal have started accusing his government of diluting the concept so sacrosanct for Punjab. And this within hours of the passage of the SYL canal blocking bill. 

Experts who spoke to this correspondent as well as some senior government officials claimed the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act 2004, by providing the legislature’s protection to the existing flow of waters to Rajasthan and Haryana, has diluted the riparian principal. As per the principal, the state of Punjab has sole rights over the waters of rivers flowing exclusively through its territory. 

A well-known expert on the river waters dispute Pritam Singh Kumedan, said Clause 5 of the Act, which protects existing usage could have been avoided as the same Act anyway stated that “even though the states of Haryana and Rajasthan are neither riparian nor basin states they have continued to utilize the waters of rivers Ravi and Beas …the State of Punjab as a good neighbour accepted such utilizations as usage ‘by sufferance’, but not as a matter of any recognition of their rights.”  

“This was enough to enable Punjab to continue the flow of waters to the two states,” said former Chief Engineer and river waters expert G.S. Dhillon. Clause 5 states that “(A)ll existing and actual utilizations through the existing systems shall remain protected and unaffected” notwithstanding the termination of discharge of obligation clauses. Kumedan, while maintaining that Clause 5 “does dilute the sacrosanct riparian principle,” said perhaps Amarinder knew well that he would need to quote such an exclusive provision protecting existing usage to stem the storm that followed. 

“With benefit of hindsight, perhaps the government has done well, though I must say I did have my reservations on this score initially when I sat in the Assembly as a guest listening to the debate,” he said, but added the Assembly was in any case empowered to amend the Act anytime.  

Advocate General Harbhagwan Singh, when asked about this clause immediately after the passage of the Act, had said it may receive a fresh look later. But Harcharan Bains, who has keenly participated for years in the SYL debate and has been an advisor to Akali Dal president Parkash Singh Badal during the latter’s Chief Ministership, said the riparian principal remained unaffected.  

“Clause 5 is here thanks to the legislature’s will. The legislature is also empowered to withdraw its will any time. At all times, the legislature subsumes absolute rights of Punjab to control the waters of the state. There is no damage done to the riparian principal,” he said.

July 15, 2004

www.penmarks.com