Not even single brick allowed for building SYL Canal: Sukhbir Badal
Chandigarh(Punjab)[India], Nov. 10 (ANI): Deputy Chief Minister Sukhbir Singh Badal on Thursday said Punjab will not share water with any other state, in response to the Supreme Court order, which called the state government's law to terminate a water-sharing deal unconstitutional.
ANI
Nov 11, 2016 02:18 IST
Chandigarh(Punjab)[India], Nov. 10 (ANI): Deputy Chief Minister Sukhbir Singh Badal on Thursday said Punjab will not share water with any other state, in response to the Supreme Court order, which called the state government's law to terminate a water-sharing deal unconstitutional. The ruling Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) today called an "emergency meeting" after Punjab suffered a serious setback with the Supreme Court holding as "unconstitutional" the 2004 law passed by it to terminate the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) canal water sharing agreement with neighbouring states. "A decision taken at an emergency meeting of Punjab cabinet said that Punjab Government would not allow the SYL to be built at any cost nor a single brick would be allowed to be laid for its construction by any agency," Sukhbir said. On Thursday, the Supreme Court ruled against the Punjab government in Sutlej Yamuna Link Canal (SYL) case, which if made operational will take waters of Punjab to Haryana. In a clear message for the Haryana government, Badal said, "As far as legal steps are concerned, advocate will advise us on what can be legally done. Our main aim is to not let the water go, and we will do anything for that. We want to assure people of Punjab that only we can do this, and resignation in Congress is just a drama." Punjab plunged into a political crisis after the Supreme Court ruled earlier in the day that a state law scrapping water-sharing agreements with other states is unconstitutional. The court also ruled that the Sutlej Yamuna canal (SYL canal), which is at the centre of a row between Punjab and Haryana, has to be completed. Holding that the Punjab Termination of Agreement Act, 2004, was not in conformity with the provisions of the constitution, the court answered in the negative all the four questions referred to it in a presidential reference. A constitution bench of the court ruled that Punjab could not have taken a "unilateral" decision to terminate the agreement with Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan, Jammu and Kashmir, Delhi and Chandigarh to share of the Ravi-Beas river waters.(ANI)
Get the App
