I reported these Assembly proceedings in The Indian Express regarding the historic day when the Punjab Assembly passed the Terminator Bill. The entire script went exactly as I had reported days earlier in The Indian Express. It was amusing for me to later watch the Parliament exploding over the issue and both, Congress president Sonia Gandhi as well as Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, claiming they had no inkling what CM Amarinder Singh was up to. In fact, later, The Indian Express’ CEO and Editor-in-chief, Mr Shekhar Gupta, said so in as many words in his widely-read National Interest column on the issue.
Punjab annuls all
Ravi-Beas pacts;
Assembly passes Bill unanimously;
Nation shocked
Move knocks out the basic premise of contractual obligation on which the SC judgement on SYL stands
S P Singh
CHANDIGARH
The Punjab Assembly did it today. On June 12, 2004, the state made history, trashing all existing pacts about Ravi-Beas waters sharing and swimming out of the troubled waters all dry.
The Assembly passed The Punjab Termination of Agreements Bill, 2004 unanimously and thus simply legislated itself out of the 1981 contractual obligation and any other obligation to construct the Sutlej-Yamuna Link canal, a predicament that had been staring it in the face after the June 4 Supreme Court judgment on the issue.
Two days before Punjab was to hand over the SYL canal construction work in its territory to CPWD, the agency nominated by the Centre to construct the canal, the state Assembly at its special session unanimously passed the bill, which immediately earned the nickname of Terminator Bill, annulling the 31 December, 1981 agreement signed by Chief Ministers of Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan as per which the SYL was to be constructed by Punjab Government.
All other pacts related to Ravi-Beas waters also stood terminated.
It was the 1981 Agreement, brokered by the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi which formed the main premise of the June 4 apex court judgment of Justices Ruma Pal and P Venkatarama Reddi. Today's action of the Assembly is aimed at knocking out this premise.
Even though Chief Minister Capt Amarinder Singh, who moved the Bill in the Assembly, later said so far the focus was on December 31, 1981 pact inked by then premier Gandhi, CM Punjab Darbara Singh, CM Haryana Bhajan Lal and CM Rajasthan Shiv Charan Mathur, the Bill clearly anulled all other pacts as well.
“Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force and any judgement, decree, order and decision of any Court, Tribunal or Authority, the Agreements shall be deemed to have been terminated with effect from the respective date, they were executed or made, as the case may be,'' Clause 3 titled `Termination' said. But Clause 2(b) clearly defined “Agreements” to mean “All Agreements relating to the Ravi Beas waters including the Agreement dated 31.12.81.”
“It is well-settled law that the legislature is competent to remove, or take away the basis of a judgment by law and, thereby, it does not encroach upon the power of the judiciary,” the Chief Minister told the House.
He said by such legislative action, no contempt of court was involved.
But the Bill annulling all agreements relating to sharing of Ravi-Beas waters with Haryana and Rajasthan, however, would not make any difference to the quantum being used by these two states and Delhi. “All existing and actual utilisations through the existing systems shall remain protected and unaffected.”
Advocate General of Punjab Harbhagwan Singh, who flanked Amarinder at a press conference immediately after the Bill's passage, quoted Shah Bano and Janjua cases (followed by Constitution's 85th Amendment) as examples where legislative bodies knocked down the law upon which judicial verdicts were built.
But when asked about precedents where any legislative body, state or otherwise, has legislated its way out of contractual obligation with retrospective effect, the AG had no ready answer. Principal Secretary (Irrigation) K.R.Lakhanpal said no pact stops a government from future legislation on the subject.
The 1981 agreement allocated 3.5 MAF water to Haryana and 8.60 MAF to Rajasthan out of surplus Ravi-Beas flow estimated at 17.17 MAF based on the 1921-1960 flow series.
Amarinder said the terms of the 1981 agreement have “become onerous, unfair, unreasonable and contrary to the interests of the inhabitants of Ravi-Beas basin, who have lawful rights to utilise the water of the two rivers.”
“Even though Haryana and Rajasthan are neither riparian nor basin states, they have continued to utilise Ravi-Beas waters...Besides diversion of water from a donor-deficit-basin to a surplus-basin is contrary to the National Water Policy guidelines,” he said.
But clearly, the government seemed keen not to fall foul of too many at one go. While the Bill said even though Haryana and Rajasthan were neither riparian nor basin states but have been utilising Ravi-Beas waters and Punjab accepted this utilisation as “usages by sufferance but not as a matter of any recognition of their rights,” the Clause 5 made it clear that Punjab Government did not want to muddy the waters too much.
It guaranteed the existing usage as “protected as unaffected.” The AG, when asked about it, said the Government may take up this angle later.
But the Bill also safeguarded itself by clarifying: “No civil court shall have jurisdiction to entertain any suit or proceedings in respect of any matter arising under or connected with this Act.”
The Indian Express was the first to report on July 8 the Government's move to bring in a Bill to terminate the December 31, 1981 agreement which formed the premise of June 4 SC judgement. Amarinder today also confirmed the proactive role played by former Attorney General of India Soli J Sorabjee in drafting the Bill, as reported by The Indian Express.■