SYL
Controversial Canal issue is politics for Haryana, survival for Punjab
Ground Zero
Jagtar Singh
Yesterday’s
meeting on the controversial Satluj Yamuna Link Canal issue between Punjab
Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann and his Haryana counterpart Manohar Lal Khattar in
the presence of Union Jal Shakti Minister Gajendra Singh Shekhawat, as
expected, ended in stalemate.
This canal
is to carry waters to Haryana from the Punjab rivers under the 1976 Award of
Prime Minister Indira Gandhi that was rooted in Punjab Re-organisation Act of
1966 that led to creation of Haryana.
It is
pertinent to mention that historically, this region was never part of Punjab
but transferred to this state by the British colonial government along with
Delhi in 1958 as punishment for the 1857 Sepoy Mutiny. While Delhi was taken
out after capital of colonial India shifted from Fort William, Calcutta, the
Haryana region continued to be part of Punjab till 1966.
The
construction of this canal the foundation stone of which was laid by Indira
Gandhi at Kapoori village in Punjab on April 8, 1982 was stopped in 1990
following the killing of its chief engineer and superintending engineer of Punjab
portion by the Babbar Khalsa activist Balwinder Singh Jatana and his
associates. About 90 of the work had been completed by then. Not a brick has
been added since then. The song titled SYL by Sidhu Moosewala was ostensibly
banned due to reference to Jatana though no reason was given for it. Punjab
river waters have been virtually on fire for years during militancy.
Khattar has
reiterated the well known stand of his state that the basic issue is that of construction of the canal and not the
availability of water in Punjab rivers per se. The Supreme Court has taken
almost similar stand.
The issue,
however, needs to be reviewed pragmatically under the changed situation.
Before the
changed situation is discussed, it is pointed out that Punjab is the only state
in the country 70 per cent of whose river waters flow out to neighbouring
states of Punjab, Haryana and semi-state of Delhi.
And Punjab
happens to be granary of India.
The irony,
however, is that less than 30 per cent of the area under cultivation is
irrigated by the canal water and the rest by the tube wells.
The present
wheat-paddy crop cycle was encouraged by the Union Government under Green
Revolution to feed the country. Paddy was not popular in Punjab before Green
Revolution.
The problem
is that the politicians in Punjab continue with the rhetoric that not a drop of
water would be allowed to flow to other states while 70 per cent is already
flowing out and the same cannot be stopped.
Punjab had
objected immediately after Indira Gandhi had announced her award in 1976. Of
course, the first notification to acquire land for this project and that too
under emergency clause was issued in February 1978 when Parkash Singh Badal was
the chief minister heading the Akali Dal government. Intervention from
Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee chief Gurcharan Singh Tohra stalled
this move following which Haryana approach Supreme court followed by Punjab
that challenged ultra vires of the sections 78, 79 and 80 of the reorganisation
act. Rest is history. The Akali Dal had, of course, launched Morcha at Kapoori
against construction of this canal that was later merged with Dharamyudh Morcha.
The SYL
canal was designed to carry 3.5 MAF of this share.
Haryana has
been drawing more than 1.60 MAF from this share all along through the Bhakra
canal system. The Shiromani Akali Dal made the commitment to complete
construction of this canal within a year under the Punjab accord signed between
prime minister Rajiv Gandhi and Sant Harchand Singh Longowal on July 24, 1985.
It was stopped by Jatana in 1990 when almost 90 per cent of the work on this
project had been completed. That structure has been damage since then.
The SYL
Canal is designed to augment irrigation systems in parched land of Haryana.
This gives rise to one very basic aspect. What would be the cost of the
cultivation of that crop irrigated by this canal as compared to the areas near
the canal head? It is simple question of cost-benefit analysis. It is not a
question of politics but economics. The
cost-benefit analysis was never done, not only of this project but also of the
Rajasthan Canal that is known as the Indira Gandhi Canal in the desert state
carrying water from Punjab rivers.
There is yet
more important dimension. The issue is of just 1.88 MAF of water whereas much
more water can be conserved by using modern technology of irrigation and water
harvesting.
This
sensitive matter should be viewed in the backdrop of modern water management
technology rather than raising the passions and regional tension. What is
needed is pragmatic approach.
Going by
Khattar’s emphasis that it is construction of canal that should be prioritised,
it is evident that it is more of a political issue.
The BJP in
Haryana had raked up this dispute between the two neighbouring states during
the Kisan agitation that was joined by farmers from Haryana too. However, the
farmers in the two states now understand the design of the political parties to
milk this issue.
The issue
should be to provide water to Haryana, not necessarily through SYL Canal. It
can be done through water harvesting. Haryana can be supplied Ganga waters too.
Punjab CM
yesterday raised the issue of share from Yamuna that used to be Riparian to
Punjab till 1966 but was never made part of the river waters apportionment.
Political parties in Punjab including the Akali Dal have been taking up this
issue of share from Yamuna.
However, the
basic approach needs to change and the issue should be taken out of the realm
of politics.
Comments
Post a Comment