Bhakra dam board files plea in HC against Punjab

The Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB) on Monday moved the Punjab and Haryana high court against the Punjab government, strongly objecting to police deployment at the Nangal dam and calling it illegal and unconstitutional.

BBMB— controlled by the Union power ministry and which regulates water distribution from the Bhakra, Nangal, Pong, and Ranjit Sagar dams—said that the uncalled-for security was hampering the working of the board and sought the court’s intervention in the ongoing dispute over Punjab’s refusal to release water to Haryana.

The court issued notices to Punjab, Haryana, and BBMB, and will continue hearing the petition on Tuesday.

“This action of the state of Punjab is wholly unconstitutional and illegal and amounts to direct infringement/interference in the statutory functioning of the board of the petitioner, which is performing a function of national importance, which is sovereign in nature,” the plea said.

The developments, which came on a day Punjab passed a resolution saying not a single drop of water will be given from its share, mark the latest twist in the controversy that began on April 28, when Haryana demanded 8,500 cusecs of water from the Bhakra dam but was turned down by Punjab.

Last Wednesday, BBMB—set up by the Union power ministry in 1966 under section 79 of the Punjab Reorganisation Act— decided to allocate a total of 8,500 cusecs of water to Haryana from the Bhakra dam. Punjab’s Aam Aadmi Party government refused to accept BBMB’s decision and stopped the release of water early on Thursday at the Nangal dam, 13km downstream from Bhakra, and deployed police to guard the dam.

On Friday, the Union home ministry told BBMB to go ahead with the release of water to Haryana for the next eight days from Saturday. The decision came after a meeting chaired by Union home secretary Govind Mohan and attended by representatives of Punjab, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, and Rajasthan, the four partner states of BBMB.

But Punjab has refused to cede ground, alleging that the Bharatiya Janata Party ruled states of Haryana, Delhi and Rajasthan were trying to illegally put pressure on it. The Punjab government has maintained that it is already providing 4,000 cusecs of water to Haryana on “humanitarian” grounds and refused to give 4,500 cusecs more, claiming that the neighbouring state has already utilised its allocated share by March.

To be sure, BBMB holds the jurisdictional authority over Nangal Dam, but the structure is currently controlled by Punjab because of the police deployment.

“The Punjab government, while flouting all constitutional duties, illegally deployed a posse of cops at the BBMB Bhakra headworks and Lohand Khud escape channel. The regulator gates at Bhakra headworks, from where the water flow has to be increased for Haryana and Lohand Khud escape channel, are now under the control of Punjab police,” the BBMB plea in the high court said.

“If the police do not allow the regulator gates at Bhakra headworks to be operated and allow water to flow through Lohand Khud escape channel to Harike, the allocation of 8,500 cusecs to Haryana cannot be achieved,” the petition added.

On May 4, Punjab informed the board that police were deployed at Nangal dam for security in view of the recent terror attack at Pahalgam in Kashmir. The state also informed the high court on Monday that Haryana had overdrawn its quota of water and was now demanding irrigation water under the guise of drinking needs.

The arguments were partly heard by a division bench of chief justice Sheel Nagu and justice Sumeet Goel. Earlier, the high court also admitted two public interest petitions on this issue, one from a Haryana gram sabha and one from an advocate.

BBMB, represented by senior advocate Rajesh Garg, said that on May 1, Punjab deployed police to take control of the Nangal dam and Lohand control room, thereby obstructing the release of 8,500 cusecs of water to Haryana as decided in the BBMB board meeting.

“We do not want Punjab police at the dam, if we needed security, we can ask that from central government and paramilitary forces can be deployed; why is Punjab police present at the Nangal dam?” asked Garg.

In response, the Punjab government stated that it increased security in view of the tensions with Pakistan.

“Police has been deployed at the Nangal dam as part of security arrangements in view of the recent terror attack in Pehalgam,” senior advocate Gurminder Singh Garry said in court on Monday.

The board sought a writ of mandamus to compel Punjab to withdraw its police force and vacate the premises, alongside an interim order restraining further interference. Additional prayers included summoning case records, dispensing with advance notice and certified annexures, and covering legal costs.

BBMB said the decision to increase water allocation was taken in its technical committee meeting on April 23 to address reported drinking water shortages in Haryana, Rajasthan, and Delhi. The reallocation included 500 cusecs for Rajasthan and 496 cusecs for Delhi. Punjab, however, refused to comply beyond its voluntary offer of 4,000 cusecs, citing Haryana’s overuse and mismanagement of its share.

Appearing for Punjab, senior advocate Gurminder Singh ‘Garry’ submitted that BBMB records dated April 20 confirmed that both Haryana and Rajasthan had already drawn more water than allocated.

“Not only has Haryana drawn beyond its share, it now wants the court to issue a mandamus for the release of Punjab’s water to them. That too, on the pretext of a crisis which no longer exists,” he said.

The Punjab government informed the court that despite Haryana’s overdrawn limits, Punjab had, on humanitarian grounds, agreed to release 4,000 cusecs — more than double the 1,700 cusecs Haryana needs to meet its drinking water needs. “This was an act of generosity, but they now want 8,500 cusecs, which is clearly for irrigation, particularly for paddy, and not for survival,” Singh argued.

BBMB asserted that under the Bhakra Beas Management Board Rules, 1974, disputes should have been escalated to the central government, not resolved through force. It further warned of potential disaster due to the police’s lack of expertise in managing the dam.

“By law and by mandate, all partner states should follow all of BBMB’s decisions regarding the sharing of water, where representatives of all partner states are party to all suggestions. If a state fails to comply, then the board is left with no option but to move to court,” said a retired BBMB engineer who asked not to be named.