Will not taking sides: Centre to SC on SYL Canal dispute

The Centre today told the Supreme Court it was not taking sides in the fight between Punjab and Haryana over the sharing of water through Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) Canal.
The Centre's submission before a five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Justice A R Dave came a few hours before the Punjab Assembly passed the bill against the construction of contentious SYL canal providing for transfer of proprietary rights back to the land owners free of cost.
At the outset, Senior advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for Haryana, drew the attention of the bench about the press statement issued by Punjab Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal's office on March 13 that the Cabinet had decided to bring Punjab Sutlej-Yamuna Link Canal (Rehabilitation and Re-vesting of Proprietary Rights) Bill that would pave way for denotifying 5,300 acres of land acquired for SYL canal.

He submitted that the Presidential Reference pertaining to Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004 has been pending since that year and, when the hearing has now started, the Punjab Cabinet has taken a decision which "threatens" the federal structure of the Constitution.
The senior advocate said Haryana will move an application and oppose any such move by the Punjab.
However, the bench, also comprising Justices P C Ghose, Shiva Kirti Singh, A K Goel and Amitava Roy continued with the hearing asking Punjab's senior advocate R S Suri to take instruction on the development and apprehension expressed by Haryana.

Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar made the statement that in the hearing on Presidential Reference "the Centre will not take any side" and later the top law officer, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi joined him and made an identical submission.

However, Rohatgi said the Punjab law would have a bearing on the Presidential Reference seeking apex court's opinion on the 2004 Punjab law that was passed during the tenure of former Chief Minister Amarinder Singh terminating all water sharing agreements with neighbouring Haryana and other States.
He said if Punjab goes ahead and enacts the law, it has to be examined and a view has to be taken on it.
The Attorney General said, in the prevailing scenerio, the hearing should be adjourned after which the bench agreed to hear it on March 17.