Special Report
Editorial
Op-Ed
Opinion
Columns

Politics
Literature
Music
Art & Culture
Sikh Religion
Rights
1984
Books
Education
Business

Entertainment
Lifestyle
Travel
Health
Heritage
Sports
Kids Corner

Panjab
India
Pakistan
South Asia
US of A
Canada
Asia-Pacific
UK
Europe
Middle East
Africa
World
 

Archives
Newsletter
Advertise

Obituaries

Feedback
Contact Us
About Us
Site Map

Supreme Court to examine Terminator Act next month
WSN Bureau

NEW DELHI: Punjab will continue to have to remain on high alert to protect its waters. The Supreme Court of India has assured the Haryana government that it would begin examining from the third week of April the constitutional validity of a Punjab government law terminating its agreements with neighbouring states on sharing the Sutlej and Yamana waters. A bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan gave the assurance to senior counsel Ashok Desai, who, appearing for the Haryana government, sought an early hearing of the presidential reference seeking an examination of the issue. 

The bench, which also included Justice R.V. Raveendran and Justice J.M. Panchal, assured counsel that it would begin hearing the presidential reference tentatively from the third week of April. The matter is hanging fire since July 12, 2004, when the Punjab government enacted the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004, putting an end to its agreement on water sharing with five neighbouring states. The law was objected to by all neighbouring states - Delhi, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, and Rajasthan.  

The growing rift among the states on the issue led then president A.P.J. Abdul Kalam to refer the matter to the apex court July 22, 2004, seeking to examine the legality of the law. The Punjab government in its affidavit before the court asserted that its obligation in the implementation of the SYL canal stood discharged under this law.  

The Punjab government has said it was competent to enact the legislation since parliament had not made any law under the union list of the constitution insofar as the Ravi and Beas waters were concerned. Haryana contended: 'The Punjab law violated the provisions of the constitution as well as the basic principles and tenets concerning federalism and rule of law.' The other states too are against the Punjab law. Since its first hearing on the issue in August 2004, the matter came up for hearing more than once, but the court was not able to give substantial hearing to it till now.  

12 March 2008
 

Bookmark with

Reddit    Yahoo     Furl    Delicious