Supreme Court Slams Punjab for De-Notifying SYL Canal Land, Labels Move as "High-Handedness"

In the decades-long inter-state water dispute between Punjab and Haryana over the construction of the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) canal, the Supreme Court of India came down heavily on the Punjab government on Tuesday for de-notifying land that had been acquired for the canal's construction in furtherance of the Court’s decree.

A bench comprising Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice A.G. Masih made sharp remarks during the hearing, calling Punjab’s actions an attempt to defeat the decree of the Court. Addressing Senior Advocate Gurminder Singh, appearing for Punjab, Justice Gavai questioned, "Mr. Advocate General, was it not an act of high-handedness that once a decree was passed, land which was acquired for construction of the canal was de-notified? It is trying to defeat the decree of the Court. Clear case of high-handedness."

When the Advocate General for Punjab tried to justify the state’s actions by stating that Haryana was already receiving water based on consumption and that additional entitlement was pending before a Water Tribunal, Justice Gavai retorted, "So according to you, this Court has passed a decree without considering everything? You are attributing non-application of mind."

Background of the Dispute

The dispute dates back to 1996, when Haryana filed an original suit before the Supreme Court seeking Punjab's compliance with previous water-sharing agreements. In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled in Haryana's favor, directing Punjab to construct the canal within a year. This was reiterated in 2004.

In response, the Punjab Assembly passed the Termination of Agreements Act, 2004, attempting to annul the water-sharing arrangements. However, the move was challenged, and in 2016, a five-judge Constitution Bench held the Act unconstitutional, reaffirming Punjab’s obligation to complete the canal. “The agreement could not have been unilaterally terminated by one of the parties using legislative power,” the Court had said in the 2016 presidential reference opinion, calling any such action contrary to the Constitution and the Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956. Despite these rulings, construction remains stalled.

Court Urges Amicable Resolution

The Supreme Court directed both Punjab and Haryana to cooperate with the Union Government in finding an amicable solution to the longstanding dispute. The bench made it clear that if the matter is not resolved through such means, the Court will take it up again on August 13, 2025.

Clarification on Status Quo Order

Importantly, the Court also clarified the scope of its earlier status quo order. It specified that the status quo applies only to land in Punjab required for construction of the main SYL canal, which would connect to the already constructed canal portion in Haryana. “The dispute before the Court is with regard to the main SYL canal. It does not pertain to the internal canal network within Punjab for local distribution,” the Court stated.