TIA Correspondent
Haryana Government today sought Supreme Court’s intervention to prevent Punjab from going ahead with passing a Bill in the Assembly for returning the land acquired for the construction of the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) canal.
The Punjab Vidhan Sabha today passed the Punjab Satluj-Yamuna Link Canal Land (Transfer of Property Rights) Bill 2016 unanimously. The Bill was introduced by Punjab Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal after the Question Hour. The Bill seeks to return 3,928 acres of land free of cost to the original landowners. The Bill was passed unanimously in the House.
Arguing before a five-member Constitution Bench headed by Justice Anil R Dave, Haryana’s senior counsel Shyam Divan said the 
proposed law by Punjab would render the Presidential reference on the validity of the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004, meaningless. Under the 2004 Act, Punjab had sought to get away from its commitment to share the river waters of Ravi, Beas and Sutlej.
While the 2004 Act was aimed at defeating the purpose of two SC judgments directing Punjab to construct the SYL canal on its territory, the present move was to render the reference meaningless. Allowing Punjab to go ahead with the legislation would affect the federal structure and threaten national security, Divan pleaded.
Punjab’s senior counsel Rupinder Singh Suri and Ram Jethmalani said they did not agree with Haryana’s contention, projecting a gloomy picture of the future of the federal structure. Both of them said they had not been informed of the proposed Bill and would have to take instructions on this. Nevertheless, they said the proposed law was perhaps meant for protecting the interests of the farmers whose land had been acquired.
Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi said the Centre did not want to take sides by supporting either Punjab or Haryana. However, it was not proper for the SC to issue any order to prevent the Punjab Assembly from going ahead with the legislation. Once the law was enacted, Haryana was free to challenge it, upon which the SC could give its ruling on the validity of the Act, the AG said and suggested that the hearing on the reference could be deferred for two weeks.
The Bench, however, adjourned the hearing till March 17.
It may be recalled that Haryana has completed its portion, Punjab is against its construction, and the state legislature passed the “Punjab Termination of Agreement Act 2004”, which declared earlier agreements null and void. Public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the Punjab Termination of Agreements Bill 2004 has been filed in the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
The Act annuls the 1981 Indira Gandhi award and subsequent agreements relating to the distribution of Ravi-Beas waters among Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan.