Context: Tensions escalated between Punjab and Haryana over the Bhakra Beas Management Board’s (BBMB) decision to release an additional 4,500 cusecs of water to Haryana.
Relevance of the topic:
Prelims: Key facts related to Bhakra Nangal dam Project.
Mains: Inter-state water disputes- challenge to Cooperative Federalism.
Bhakra-Nangal Project
- Bhakra-Nangal project is among the earliest post-Independence river valley development projects, conceived as early as the 1910s.
- It comprises two separate but complementary damson the River Satluj:
- Bhakra dam in Himachal Pradesh, and the Nangal dam (10 km downstreams) in Punjab.
- Nangal dam is an extension of the Bhakra Nangal project and is situated downstream of the Bhakra dam.
- Water flows from the Bhakra dam downstream to Nangal dam, where it is controlled and released into the Nangal hydel channel.
- Before the state was split into Punjab, Haryana, and Himachal Pradesh, the Bhakra-Nangal project was under the direct control of the Punjab government.
- Bhakra Management Board was established in 1966, under Section 79 of the Punjab Reorganisation Act, to administer the project in the best interests of all three states.
- Bhakra Management Board was renamed BBMP in 1976, and given the additional task of managing projects on the River Beas, namely the Beas-Sutlej Link Project (Pandoh dam), and Pong dam, both in Himachal.
- BBMP plays a central role in the distribution of water between Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh, and Delhi. At the start of every accounting year (roughly September-August, depending on the monsoon), the BBMP determines how much water would be allocated to each state. For the current year, it allocated 5.512 million acre-feet (MAF) to Punjab, 2.987 MAF to Haryana, and 3.318 MAF to Rajasthan.
Reasons behind the Current Dispute
- Haryana’s sought an additional 4,500 cusecs for drinking water, citing scarcity in Hisar, Sirsa, and Fatehabad.
- Punjab objected to the demand arguing that reservoirs—Bhakra, Pong, and Ranjit Sagar are significantly below average levels due to scant Himalayan snowfall, and any additional release would jeopardise Punjab’s irrigation and drinking water needs.
- Despite Punjab’s objection, a majority of BBMB member states (Haryana, Rajasthan, Delhi) voted in favour of water release.
- Punjab declared BBMB’s directive “unprecedented” and “illegal”, refusing to open additional sluice gates.
- Haryana approached the Supreme Court under Article 131 for enforcement of its entitlement.
Way Forward
- Establish National Water Commission to conduct real-time water audits and establish a science-based allocation system.
- Strengthen BBMB by introducing independent hydrological experts, enforce transparency, and ensure consensus-based decisions.
- Encourage interstate alternative dispute mechanisms before approaching courts.
- Adopt Climate-Adaptive Planning - Check how much water is really available in dams each year and use weather predictions to decide how to share it, so that no state gets more or less than it should.
Also Read: River Interlinking: Merits & Challenges
Water sharing dispute between Punjab and Haryana reflect the deeper fault lines in inter-state relations and resource governance. It underscores the urgency for a transparent, evidence-based, science-driven, and equitable water-sharing framework.