The SYL canal saga: Why Punjab won’t yield, and Haryana can’t let go

The Satluj-Yamuna Link (SYL) canal case, which has been ongoing for 30 years, recently came before a three-member bench of the Supreme Court. Chief Justice Surya Kant reportedly emphasized that once trust is established, a path to resolution will also be paved. The dialogue between Punjab and Haryana has become more amicable, but observers caution whether this is a genuine shift or merely more diplomatic rhetoric.

The SYL controversy is deeply rooted in the complex relationship between Punjab and Haryana over water allocation. Punjab's resistance is not just political; overexploitation in 73-76% of its blocks has led to farmers having to dig deeper wells. The riparian principle, which gives river flow states primary rights to their waters, is a legal cornerstone in Punjab's stance.

The SYL was initially designed as a 214-km link canal, with 122 km in Punjab and 92 km in Haryana. Haryana has been completing its share of the canal for years, and its legal argument revolves around its status as a successor state of undivided Punjab. However, Punjab's termination of the agreement in 1990 and the subsequent Supreme Court ruling have complicated matters.

The recent field inspections by the Ravi-Beas Waters Tribunal, which includes retired Supreme Court judge Justice Vineet Saran, will likely determine the canal's future. Yet, even the tribunal's findings cannot compel Punjab to accept a solution that it considers punitive, leaving the two states to negotiate the terms of the SYL canal.