CHANDIGARH – In a significant legal setback for the Punjab government, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the Bhakra Beas Management Board’s (BBMB) decision to release additional water to Haryana. The court ruled that the state must address its grievances through the Union Government rather than the judiciary.
The Verdict: “Follow Statutory Protocol”
A Division Bench, presided over by Chief Justice Sheel Nagu, clarified that the court would not interfere in operational decisions regarding water distribution that fall under existing administrative frameworks.
The Bench noted that under Rule 7 of the BBMB Rules (1974), any state dissatisfied with a Board decision has a designated “alternative remedy”: presenting their case before the Central Government. The court emphasized that it had already delivered a verdict on this matter last year, and with the Supreme Court previously declining to intervene, the legal path for Punjab remains administrative, not judicial.
Punjab’s Allegations: Jurisdictional Overreach
The Punjab government’s legal team argued that the BBMB had acted beyond its legal mandate. Key points of their contention included:
-
Lack of Authority: Punjab claimed the BBMB is strictly tasked with the administration and maintenance of the project and possesses no legal right to determine or alter water allocations.
-
Procedural Lapses: The state alleged that the meeting to release 8,500 cusecs of water was convened without the mandatory seven-day notice, depriving Punjab of a fair opportunity to object.
-
Quota Violation: The petition asserted that Haryana had already exhausted its water share and that the additional release was an “arbitrary” move that ignored Punjab’s riparian rights.
BBMB Defence: Flood Prevention and Crisis Management
In a sharp rebuttal, the BBMB counsel argued that the water release was an essential operational necessity.
-
Drinking Water Crisis: The Board maintained that the release was a “one-time relaxation” to alleviate acute drinking water shortages in Haryana and Delhi.
-
Safety Measures: In a pointed observation, the Board suggested that if Punjab had cooperated with earlier water releases, the severity of the devastating floods Punjab experienced in late 2025 might have been mitigated by creating more storage capacity in the reservoirs.
What Lies Ahead?
With the dismissal of this petition, the Punjab government is now forced to pivot its strategy. To seek a reversal or adjustment of water release orders, the state must now formally approach the Union Ministry of Power or the Union Home Secretary.
This ruling reinforces the precedent that technical disputes over river water sharing—often politically charged—should be settled by specialized boards and the Central Government under the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966, rather than through repeated litigation in the High Court.
Leave a Reply