The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday directed the Centre, Haryana, and the Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB) to respond to a petition filed by the Punjab government seeking review of the court’s May 6 order directing the release of 4,500 cusecs of additional water to Haryana.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel fixed May 20 for the next hearing.
According to a state government spokesperson, Punjab raised strong objections to the Centre’s May 2 intervention, contending that Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan lacked jurisdiction under the BBMB rules to decide on water allocation. Representing Punjab, senior counsel Gurminder Singh, along with Advocate General Maninderjit Singh Bedi and Additional Advocate General Chanchal Singla, argued that the BBMB had “misrepresented facts to execute an illegal order” favouring Haryana.
The May 6 high court order had directed Punjab to comply with the decision taken during a meeting chaired by the Union Home Secretary, which advised the release of 4,500 cusecs of extra water from Bhakra Dam to Haryana for eight days to meet urgent requirements.
Punjab, however, objected to the involvement of the Union Home Secretary, asserting that under Article 262 of the Constitution and the Inter-State Water Disputes Act, 1956, any allocation of water exceeding the determined share must involve Punjab’s consent and could only be settled by a water tribunal.
The Punjab government maintained that it had already consented to supply 4,000 cusecs of water daily to Haryana, but strongly opposed the additional demand. The state also informed the court that at an extraordinary BBMB meeting on April 28, it had formally objected to Haryana’s overall demand of 8,500 cusecs, and no consensus had been reached.
In its review petition filed on May 12, Punjab challenged the decision alleging procedural violations and claimed that the BBMB was “illegally diverting Punjab’s water to Haryana at the behest of the BJP-led Centre.” The petition noted that the May 2 meeting was inaccurately portrayed as an official decision-making forum, as no formal minutes were shared with the state authorities. Instead, only a press note was issued, which Punjab argues cannot be considered an official record.
The state further alleged that the BBMB proceeded to release the additional water without following the required legal process and without proper documentation or authorization.
The High Court has now asked all concerned parties to submit their responses by May 20.
