In its 10 November 2016 advisory opinion, the Supreme Court (SC) of India nullified the Punjab Termination of Agreement Act, 2004. This inter-State water sharing termination act of the Punjab government had challenged the constitutional authority of the Union government over the states. The SC looked at that dimension of the Punjab Termination of Agreement Act, 2004, and maintained the constitutional supremacy of the Union government over the states. This article discusses the federal water relationships in India, and then examines the river water disputes between the Indian states of Punjab and Haryana. The author argues that the growing inter-State water disputes in India have also challenged the federal constitutional arrangement which holds the primacy of the Union government over the State governments in matters relating to regulation and development of inter-State waters and river valleys.
AhmedI. (2011). The Punjab bloodied, partitioned and cleansed: Unravelling the 1947 tragedy through secret British reports and first person accounts. New Delhi: Rupa Publications.
2.
‘Case No.: Original Suite 6 of 1996’ (2002). Supreme Court of India. Retrieved from http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/jonew/judis/18220.pdf
3.
Central Water Commission (2016). Ambedkar’s contribution to water resources development. Ministry of Water Resources, River Development and Ganga Rejuvenation, Government of India. Retrieved from http://cwc.gov.in/main/downloads/Ambedkar’s%20Book.pdf
4.
ChakravartiU., & HaksarN. (1987). The Delhi riots: Three days in the life of a nation. New Delhi: Lancer International.
5.
ChokkakulaS. (2017). Why do inter state disputes emerge and recur? An anatomy of ambiguities, antagonisms and asymmetries (Monograph). Hyderabad: Centre for Economic and Social Studies.
6.
Constituent Assembly Debates (Proceedings) Volume IX. Retrieved from http://parliamentofindia.nic.in/ls/debates/debates.htm
7.
DhaliwalS. (2014, July16). Decades on, SYL canal issue hangs fire. The Tribune. Retrieved from http://www.tribuneindia.com/2014/20140716/main7.htm
8.
Draft National Water Framework Bill (2016). Ministry of Water Resources, River development & Ganga rejuvenation. Government of India. Retrieved from http://wrmin.nic.in/writereaddata/Water_Framework_18July_2016.pdf
9.
Express News Service (ENS) (2016, March21). Sutlej-Yamuna link canal issue field of dreams. Indian Express. Retrieved from http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/sutlej-yamuna-link-canal-issue-field-of-dreams/
10.
GopalN. (2016, March11). SYL canal: Why SAD-BJP and Congress are fishing in troubled waters. The Indian Express. Retrieved from http://indianexpress.com/article/explained/satluj-yamuna-link-canal-sad-bjp-congress-punjab-haryana/
11.
GopalN. (2016, November12). SYL issue: Punjab CM Badal writes to President Pranab Mukherjee, seeks audience. The Indian Express. Retrieved from http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/syl-issue-cm-badal-writes-to-president-pranab-mukherjee-seeks-audience-4370977/
12.
GulhatiN. D. (1972). Development of inter-state rivers: Law and practice in India. Bombay: Allied Press.
13.
IndiraK. (2008). Bogged down by politics and litigation: Water conflicts in India. In JoyK. J., GujjaB., GoudS. P. V., & VisputeS. (Eds.), Water conflicts in India: A million revolt in making (pp. 388–393). New Delhi: Routledge.
14.
Interstate River Water Disputes Act, 1956. Ministry of Water Resources, River development & Ganga rejuvenation. Government of India. Retrieved from http://lawmin.nic.in/ld/P-ACT/1956/A1956-33.pdf
15.
Interstate River Water Disputes Act, 1956 amendment bill (2017). Press Information Bureau. Retrieved from http://pib.nic.in/newsite/mbErel.aspx?relid=159201
16.
IyerR. R. (2007). Towards water wisdom: Limits, justice, harmony. New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
17.
IyerR. R. (2011, June18). Should water be moved to concurrent list?The Hindu Retrieved from http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/should-water-be-moved-to-concurrent-list/article2113384.ece
18.
KhemkaA. (2016, March16). Dear Governor Solanki: Please withhold your assent to the Punjab SYL. Indian Express. Retrieved from http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/dear-governor-solanki/
19.
Ministry of Water ResourcesRiver development and Ganga rejuvenation. Government of India. Mahadayi/Mandovi River. Retrieved from http://mowr.gov.in/acts-tribunals/current-inter-state-river-water-disputes-tribunals/mahadayimandovi-river
20.
National Commission for Reviewing Constitution (2002). Ministry of law justice and company affairs (Vol. II, Book 3). Department of Legal Affairs, Government of India. Retrieved from lawmin.nic.in/ncrwc/ncrwcreport.htm
21.
RajlakshmiT. K. (2004). A crucial intervention. Frontline, 21(13). Retrieved from http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl2113/stories/20040702002604700.htm
22.
RE: The Punjab Termination of Agreement Act, 2004. (2016). The Supreme Court of India advisory jurisdiction special reference no. 1. Retrieved from http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/jonew/bosir/orderpdf/2820491.pdf
23.
Report of the Commission on Centre-State Relations (2010). Report. Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. Retrieved from http://interstatecouncil.nic.in/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/volume6.pdf
24.
Report of the States Reorganisation Commission (1955). Report. Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. p. 45. Retrieved from http://mha.nic.in/sites/upload_files/mha/files/State%20Reorganisation%20Commisison%20Report%20of%201955_270614.pdf
25.
SankaranK. (2009). Water in India: Constitutional perspectives. In IyerR. R. (Ed.), Water and laws in India (pp. 17–31). New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
26.
Sarkaria Commission Report (1988). (Chapter xvii)Inter-state water disputes. Inter-State Council Secretariat, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India. Retrieved from http://interstatecouncil.nic.in/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/CHAPTERXVII.pdf
27.
SiddiqiT. A., & ShirinT.-K. (2004). Water conflicts in South Asia: Managing water resource disputes within and between countries of the region. Project Implemented by Global Environment and Energy in the 21st Century (GEE-21) and the School of Advanced International Studies, John Hopkins University (SAIS), Sponsored by the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Retrieved from http://www.WaterConflictsInSouthAsia2004[pdfa].PDF
28.
SinghJ. (2016, March6). How the river water dispute may change the course of Punjab politics. Retrieved from http://thewire.in/23993/how-the-river-waters-disputemay-change-the-course-of-punjab-politics/
29.
SubramaniamN. (2016, March28). In fact: In a 1973 book, some perspective on Punjab’s stand on SYL. Indian Express. https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/in-fact-in-a-1973-book-some-perspective-on-punjabs-stand-on-syl/.
30.
SuriS. S. (2015). 1984: The anti-Sikh violence and after. Noida: Harper Collins.
31.
SwamiP. (2004a). A long running dispute. Frontline, 21(16). Retrieved from http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl2116/stories/20040813003902800.htm
32.
SwamiP. (2004b). A canal crisis. Frontline. Retrieved from http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl2116/stories/20040813004202500.htm
33.
The Constitution of India (2015). Report. Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India. Retrieved from http://lawmin.nic.in/olwing/coi/coi-english/coi-4March2016.pdf
34.
The Supreme Court of India (2018). The State of Karnataka by its Chief Secretary versus the State of Tamil Nadu by its Chief Secretary & Ors. The Supreme Court of India. Retrieved from supremecourtofindia.nic.in/supremecourt/2007/11993/11993_2007_Judgement_16-Feb-2018.pdf
35.
VasudevK. (2019, 3September. Give us Yamuna water if Haryana wants SYL: Punjab's stand. The Indian Express. Retrieved from https://indianexpress.com/article/india/give-us-yamuna-water-if-haryana-wants-syl-punjabs-stand-5960493/.
36.
WoodJ. R. (2007). The politics of water resource development in India: Narmada Dam controversy. New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
