You are here: Home » News-ANI » National
Business Standard

SYL canal issue: Punjab-Haryana CM's meet President, remain adamant on stand

ANI  |  New Delhi [India] 

The delegation led by Chief Minister and the delegation led by Chief Minister Manohar Lal Khattar President on Monday at his official residence and asked him, the custodian of the Constitution, to act on his official capacity to resolve the differences over the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) canal issue after the Supreme Court's verdict favoured

Khattar, who was the first to visit the Rashtrapathi Bhavan, asked the President to ensure that the apex verdict is implemented so that gets its due.

"Today we, the all party from Haryana, the President and asked him to impellent this rule so that get its share through the SYL canal. This country has a federal structure and it runs by the Constitution. The Supreme bench declared that the resolution taken by the government against the SYL as void. We only want our share of water, we are not asking for Punjab's share," Khattar told media.

Meanwhile, Badal, affirmed in his stance, declared that the Central government has no role in the water disputes while stressing that Punjab's agriculture sector would be severely affected if the verdict is implemented since the Centre is heavily dependent on the state for the Food Security Act to function.

"I am pained to say that has faced injustice politically and economically. This issue is a very serious one. The nations' food security is heavily dependent on and for that we need water. Water is a natural resource; it is not controlled by any state or central government. Punjab, a riparian state has the exclusive right over its water and other states like Rajasthan and have no claim in it. We have put forward our views in front of the President and believe that we will get justice from him," Badal said.

The apex had on Thursday termed the law passed by in 2004 to terminate the SYL canal water sharing agreement with neighbouring states "unconstitutional".

Holding that the Termination of Agreement Act, 2004, was not in conformity with the provisions of the constitution, the answered in the negative all the four questions referred to it in a presidential reference.

A constitution bench of the ruled that could not have taken a "unilateral" decision to terminate the agreement with Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan, Jammu and Kashmir, Delhi and Chandigarh to share of the Ravi-Beas river waters.

(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

RECOMMENDED FOR YOU