delhi's watery woes
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
1/100
OCCASIONALPAPE
R-1 Delhis Watery Woes
A Cross-sectoral Analysis of the Water Crisis in Delhi
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
2/100
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
3/100
Dr. Arun Kumar Singh
Delhis Watery WoesA Cross-sectoral Analysis of the Water Crisis in Delhi
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
4/100
Published by:Centre for Trade & Development (Centad)
# 406, Bhikaiji Cama Bhavan
Bhikaiji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110066
Tel:+91 - 11 - 41459226, Fax:+91 - 11 - 41459227
Email: [email protected], Web: www.centad.org
Design and Printing by
New Concept Information Systems Pvt. Ltd.
Plot No. 5, Institutional Area, Sarita Vihar
New Delhi- 110 076
Tel: 26972748, 26972743
Copyright The Author, 2006
The author of this paper, Dr. Arun Kumar Singh, is a writer, researcher and
activist. A geologist by training, Dr. Singh has done his M. Tech. in Applied
Geology, Ph.D. in remote sensing and plate tectonics with a diploma in Soil and
Water Conservation Engineering. From 1977-88 he has also worked on teaching
and research assignments at Sagar University and Bhopal University. His other
published books are Interlinking of Rivers in India: A Preliminary Assessment
(2003), Privatisation of Rivers in India (2004) and Privatisation of Water Supply
in Mumbai (2006), among others. He has also published over 300 articles on
environmental and developmental issues.
Centad Occasional Papers are intended to disseminate the preliminary findings
of ongoing research both within and outside Centad on issues linked to trade and
development for the purpose of exchanging ideas and catalysing debate. The views,
analysis and conclusions are of the author/s only and may not necessarily reflect
the views or position of Centad. Readers are encouraged to quote or cite this paperwith due acknowledgement to the author and Centad.
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
5/100
iii
During the course of this study, author has interacted with a large number of persons who have
been kind enough to share their valuable experience, knowledge, expertise and information
for which author is thankful to them. These include officials of Delhi Jal Board, trade union
leaders of workers union of Delhi Jal Board, and Municipal Corporation of Delhi. In this
regard, I would especially like to thank Mr. S. A. Naqvi, Delhi Jal Board and Water Workers
Alliance, who has been kind enough to grant me his valuable time for a series of meetings,
often at very short notice, and had been very patient to explain everything to last meticulousdetail. I have been immensely benefited by these sessions.
Similarly author wishes to thank many officials of Delhi government posted in different
departments like, Department of Urban Development, Department of Environment and
others. Thanks are also due to officials of Central Ground Watter Board who have been
kind enough to discuss various dimensions related to the problems of water availability,
augmentation and supply in Delhi.
The author wishes to thankfully acknowledge the cooperation extended by NGOs like
Tapas, Pani Panchayat, and Parivartan, especially the last. Mr. Arvind Kejriwal of Parivartan,has been very helpful by giving me liberal access to all the documents they have obtained
from Delhi Government, under the newly introduced Delhi Right to Information Act, after
a long hassle of six months with government. The author has also been benefited by the
continuing discussions with a number of friends on this issue over a period of time and wishes
to put a few names on record. These are Mr. Anupam Mishra (Gandhi Peace Foundation),
Mr. Shubhranshu Chowdhary (T. V. Journalist), Mr. Vinod Verma (BBC, Delhi), and
Prof. Sanjai Bhatt (Delhi School of Social Works).
Author wishes to express his sincere thanks to Dr. Samar Verma, Centad, for giving him an
opportunity to carry out this study. Interactions with Mr. Robin Koshy (Centad) throughout
the study-tenure have been helpful to ensure that the study remain focused content wise.
However, any shortcoming in the text presented here should be attributed only to author and
none of the persons named above are responsible for it in any manner. Similarly, the views
expressed herein are exclusively authors own and should not be necessarily misconstrued as
the views of the Centad.
Acknowledgements
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
6/100
iv
Delhi, the capital city of India begins to reel under a water crisis in summer and lot of noise
is made for further augmentation of water from other sources. The phenomenon, first
experienced in the decade of seventies has aggravated with each passing year. The ever-
swelling population of Delhi, drying up of its own traditional water harvesting structures, a
number of management and administrative lapses, transformation of Yamuna literally into
a water sewer, misuse and abuse of water resources, non-recovery of secondary and tertiary
water, and host of other factors have compounded the problem manifold. The net result is
increase in the plight of common masses in summer and there seems to be no respite in near
future too. Summer of 2005 was no exception when we witnessed a drama being played in
public for demand of more water and its acceptance and immediate denials
The present study is an attempt to explore this multi-facet problem and various dimensions
related to it water disputes with neighbouring states, official structure of water supply,
policy level issues, management issues, and so on and so forth. The ongoing debate over
the privatisation of Delhi Jal Board and its implications are also been commented, including
the questionable manner in which this process is being pursued within the overall national
framework of reforms and liberalisation in water sector. Lastly options for future have been
explored.
ARUN KUMAR SINGH
Preface
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
7/100
v
Abbreviations
ADB : Asian Development Bank
ASI : Archaeological Survey of India
BCM : Billion Cubic Metres
CGWB : Central Groundwater Board
CPWD : Central Public Works Department
DDA : Delhi Development Authority
DGS&S : Directorate General of Supplies and Disposals
DJB : Delhi Jal Board
DWSB : Delhi Water and Sewage Board
DWSSP : Delhi Water Supply and Sewage Project
EOI : Expression of Interest
FIR : First Information Report
GATS : General Agreement on Trade in Services
GATT : General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
GEF : Global Environmental Facility
JJ : Jhuggi-Jhompri
JTUs : Jackson Turbidity UnitsLPCD : Litres Per Capita Per Day
MAF : Million Acre Feet
MCD : Municipal Corporation of Delhi
MLD : Million Litres per Day
MNC : Multi National Corporation
MOU : Memorandum of Understanding
NCT : National Capital Territory
NDMC : New Delhi Municipal Corporation
NRW : Non-Revenue Water
O&M : Operation & Maintenance
PPF : Project Preparation Facility
PRSP : Poverty Reduction Strategic Programme
PWC : Price Waterhouse Cooper
SAP : Structural Adjustment Programme
SYL : Satluj-Yamuna Link
TMC : Thousand Million Cubic Metres
TOR : Terms of ReferenceUWSS : Urban Water Supply Sewerage
WTO : World Trade Organisation
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
8/100
vi
Contents
Acknowledgements iii
Preface iv
Abbreviations v
1. Introduction 1
1.1 Population of Delhi 1
1.2 Physiographic Features of Delhi 1
1.3 Green Cover of Delhi 3
1.4 Delhi: Water in the Past 5
1.5 Current Sources of Water for Delhi 9
1.6 Present Water Requirements of Delhi 9
1.7 Hydro Politics of Water in Delhi 10
2. Water Rights and DelhiHaryana Water Dispute 11
2.1 What are Water Rights? 12
2.2 Evolution of Water Rights in India 12
2.3 Groundwater Rights 17
2.4 Yamuna River and Delhi-Haryana-Uttar Pradesh Triangle 18
2.5 The Ravi-Beas Water Dispute: Haryana-Punjab 19
2.6 The Satluj-Yamuna Link (SYL): Haryana-Punjab 19
2.7 The Constitutional Crisis 21
2.8 Arguments put forth by Punjab and Haryana 22
3. Bottlenecks in Delhi Water Supply System 27
I. Policy/Institutional Issues 273.1 Loss of Water during Water Transportation from Haryana 27
3.2 Financial Loss Incurred during Water Transportation from Haryana 28
3.3 Faulty Site Selection of Water Treatment Plants 28
3.4 Policy of Power Tariff for Delhi Jal Board 30
3.5 Inter-Departmental Wrangling 30
3.6 Lack of Innovation in Water Supply 31
3.7 Mirage of Proposed 24X7 Scheme 31II. Distributional/Technical Issues 32
3.8 Energy and Water: Interdependency and Implications 32
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
9/100
vii
3.9 Faulty Water Supply Network 33
3.10 Recycling Water within Treatment Plants 34
3.11 DJBs Sewage Treatment Plants (STPs) 34
3.12 Quality of DJB Supplied Water 35
3.13 Iniquitous Distribution of Water in Delhi 35
3.14 Five Star Hotels and VIP Residences 39
3.15 Water Supply Hours per Day 39
3.16 The Non-Revenue Water (NRW) 40
3.17 Problems Related with Groundwater Exploitation and its Quality 41
3.18 Emergence of a Water Mafia 42
III. Other Technical Issues 43
3.19 Non-Enforcement of Legal Rights by DJB against Violators 43
3.20 Water Meters 43
3.21 Water Tariff Hike 44
3.22 Problems of Rainy Season 44
3.23 Plight of the Yamuna River 44
4. Privatisation of Delhi Jal Board and Its Impact 49
4.1 Current Status of Water Sector Reforms in India 49
4.2 Genesis of Privatisation of DJB 50
4.3 World Banks Loan for Delhi Water Supply and Sewage Project (DWSSP) 52
4.4 Selection of Price Waterhouse Cooper (PWC) as Consultant 53
4.5 World Bank Price Waterhouse Cooper Linkage 56
4.6 Suez-Degremont: Sonia Vihar Water Treatment Plant 57
4.7 Impacts of Privatisation 58
4.8 Groundwater of Delhi for MNCs? 61
4.9 Alternatives to Privatisation 62
4.10 World Banks Recommendations put on Hold 634.11 World Banks Policies: An Overview 64
5. The Conflict Resolution and Other Options for Delhi 81
5.1 General 81
5.2 Proposals of Pani Morcha 81
5.3 Rejuvenation of Traditional Water Harvesting Structures 84
5.4 Grey Water Reclamation Project 85
5.5 Ocean of Groundwater found on Delhis Border 85
6. Concluding Note 87
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
10/100
viii
List of Tables
Table 1: Different Categories of JJ Settlement in Delhi 1
Table 2: Sources of Water for Delhi 9
Table 3: Water Treatment Plants in Delhi 10
Table 4: Water Augmentation Schedule of DJB for 2021 30
Table 5: Iniquitous Water Distribution in Delhi 36
Table 6: Water Supply Structure in Delhi 39
Table 7: Average Daily Household Water Supply (hours/day) 40
Table 8: Water Consumption in Delhi 48
Table 9: List of DJB Units Transferred to MNCs 52
Table 10: Categorisation of DJB Employees 59
Table 11: PWC-Proposed Water Tariff Structure 60
Table 12: Loan from the Government to Finance the Cash Deficit 61
Table 13: Waterbodies Existing in Delhi 85
List of Maps
Map 1: The Ridge Forest in Delhi 2
Map 2: Encroachment in The Ridge Forest, Delhi 4
Map 3: Water Channels of Delhi 6
Map 4: Changing Course of Yamuna River 7
Map 5: Present Map of Delhi 8
Map 6: Location of Water Treatment Plants in Delhi 29
Map 7A: Water Zones in Delhi 37
Map 7B: Ward-wise Water Supply 38
Map 8: Drains/Nallas Meeting River Yamuna in Delhi 46
Annexure: 1
Annexure: 2 Annexure: 3
Annexure: 4
Annexure: 5
Annexure: 6
Annexure: 7
Annexure: 8
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
11/100
Design and Printing by
New Concept Information Systems Pvt. Ltd.
Plot No. 5, Institutional Area, Sarita Vihar
New Delhi - 110 076
Tel: 26972748, 26972743
LPCD : Litres Per Capita Per Day
I. Policy/Institutional Issues
II. Distributional/Technical Issues
Annexure: 1
Annexure: 2
Annexure: 3Annexure: 4
Annexure: 5
Annexure: 6
Annexure: 7
Annexure: 8
Legend:
1. Police camp
2. DESU Power Tower
3. Converted into a Park
4. Hindurao Hospital
5. Blasting Site
6. Ravindra Rangshala7. Gurudwara Nanak Sahib
and petrol Pump
8. Widening of Shankar Road
9. Schools (Manav Sthali,
Army Public, Springdales
and J. D. Tytler)
10. Talkatora Complex
11. Army Camp
12. Petrol Pump
13. Buddha Jayanti Park
14. Delhi Polo Ground
15. Army School Housing
Complex
16. SITE
17. Shooting Range
18. Mahavir Jayanti Park
19. Residential Colonies
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
12/100
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
13/100
Delhis Watery Woes 1
From earlier times, Delhi has been a chosen seat of power for successive dynasties Slave Dynasty, Khiljis, Tughlaqs, Sayyads and Lodis between 12th and 16thcenturies. Later the Mughals made it their capital in the 17th century and finally the
British also made Delhi their capital in the 20th century. So it was considered natural
for Delhi to be the capital of independent India in 1947. Before entering into any
discussion on the prevailing water crisis in Delhi, it would be relevant to have a birds
eye view of the city, the way its population lives, its forest cover, the Yamuna river and
some other related aspects.
1.1. Population of DelhiThe national capital city of Delhi is spread over an area of 1483 sq km inclusive of
the area falling under New Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC) and the Delhi
Cantonment. On the basis of the Census data, it has a population of 1.37 crores
in 2001 and as per the new Draft Master Plan of DDA, the city has a population
of 1.60 crores. The Delhi Jal Board (DJB) is the official agency responsible for the
provision of drinking water to the citizens of Delhi. A majority of the population
of Delhi, about 1.06 crores, live in Jhuggi-Jhompri (JJ) clusters while a mere 31
lakh people live in Planned Colonies. The distribution of different categories of JJcolonies is shown in Table 1.
S. No. Settlement-Type Number of Settlements
1. Unauthorised JJ Colonies 1071
2. Regularised JJ Colonies 567
3. JJ Clusters 820
4. Urban Villages 126
5. Rural Villages 135
6. Harijan Colonies 219
TABLE 1
Different Categories of JJ Settlement in Delhi
Source: NCR Fact Sheet
There are 2938 JJ clusters in Delhi, as
per the latest available official data.
1.2. Physiographic Features ofDelhiThe area under Delhi can be divided into
following physiographic features: theridge and its forest, undulating surfaces,
plains and flood plains, the Najafgarh
drain and the Yamuna River.
Ridge is a part of the Aravalli Range,
entering Delhi from the South,
bifurcating into two and finally spreading
1. Introduction
itself into a wider tableland. The ridge is divided into Northern Ridge (Delhi University),
Central Ridge, South Central Ridge (Mehrauli) and Southern Ridge (Map 1). The Northern
Ridge has an area of 87 ha, the Central Ridge has an area of 869 ha, the South Central Ridge
has an area of 626 ha and the Southern Ridge has an area of 6,200 ha including 1900 ha of the
recently notified Asola Wildlife Sanctuary.
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
14/100
Introduction2
MAP 1
The Ridge Forest in Delhi
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
15/100
Delhis Watery Woes 3
The width of the Ridge varies from 50-100
meters at Wazirabad to as wide as 2.5 km near
Chanakyapuri. The total Ridge area in Delhi is
approximately 22.9 sq km. In 1912, when Delhi
became the capital of British India, the Ridge was
declared a forest under the Indian Forest Act 1913
and a similar status was extended to the Central
Ridge in 1942. Further, in 1980 the Northern
Ridge and Southern Ridge were also declared as
reserve forests. At present, only two segments of
the Ridge the Northern Ridge and the Southern
Ridge remain as green buffers.
In 1960, 48 percent of the ridge area was covered
under forest while today it is a mere eight percent.
To make matters worse MCD is using a part
of the ridge for dumping garbage. A number
of encroachment in the ridge area (Map 2),
predominantly by the rich and powerful sections
of society, have strangulated the ridge.
The Yamuna flood plains cover an area of 161 sq
km, extending up to a maximum of 14 km from the
river in the north. It has been subdivided into three
categories: new Khadar or the current flood plains,old Khadar or the earlier flood plains and Bangar or
the upper alluvial plains. Most of the river features
have been obliterated by land reclamation as well
as land leveling of the urbanisation process.
The Najafgarh drain flows in a northeast direction
and joins the Yamuna near Wazirabad. A century
ago, the Najafgarh drain reportedly covered an area
of 22,663 ha and was 4.2 meters deep. Since 1940onwards it has been drained and cultivated to the
extent that it has completely lost its sheen.
1.3. Green Cover of DelhiThough it is claimed that Delhi is the third greenest
city in the world with 33000 acres of green area
within its boundaries (first being New York with
1,10,000 acres greenery and second London with
55,000 acres, within their city-boundaries), but
the reality is far from the truth. According to
a recent report [1], only 10.2 percent of Delhis
total area is covered under forests, i.e., 111.33 sq
km, against the stipulated 33 percent for a healthy
environment.
However, a more disturbing fact is that only 38
sq km of the area falls under dense forests and is
restricted to New Delhi and South Delhi. Eastern,
Western and Northern Delhi have less than three
percent of their area under trees. In colonies like
Seelampur and posh areas like Punjabi Bagh, the
number of trees is almost negligible.
In East Delhi, much of the green area is under
illegal occupation. A major factor contributing to
deforestation is the felling of trees for widening
of roads. The New Delhi Municipal Corporation
(NDMC) has felled thousands of old trees for
widening roads. Recently in 2004, NDMC has
carried out massive tree felling near the Prime
Ministers residence at Race Course Road, for
constructing a parking place. As per the officials
of the Department of Forests and Environment,
Government of Delhi, official permission has been
granted for the felling of 15,144 trees (more than 50
year old trees) between January 2002 to July 2004.
The Public Relations Officer of NDMC has
stated that the number of trees planted are many
times more than the number of trees felled. Every
year various agencies of the Delhi Government
(NDMC, DDA, Forest Department, Horticulture
department, etc.) claim to carry out plantation of
6-7 lakh trees. The Horticulture Departments of
these agencies have an annual budget of Rs. 100
crore for this purpose. However, all this moneyis lining the pockets of the corrupt officials as
corroborated by the raids of the CBI on the
premises of Director, Horticulture Department, in
Delhi [2].
Moreover, it is an irony that no department has
any record of the survival and growth rate of these
trees. According to the Environment Secretary of
the Delhi Government, he has recently asked all
these agencies to furnish records in this regard, but
it is bound to take some time. During this period,
the official agencies will continue to take advantage
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
16/100
Introduction4
MAP 2
Places of Encroachment on the Ridge
Encroachment on the Ridge
In 1960, 48 percent of the area under the ridge
was covered with forests, today it is a mere 8
per cent
The MCD is using a part of the Southern Ridgefor dumping garbage
Majority of the encroachments (as shown in the
map above) are by the rich.
Legend:
1. Police camp
2. DESU Power Tower
3. Converted into a Park
4. Hindurao Hospital
5. Blasting Site
6. Ravindra Rangshala
7. Gurudwara Nanak Sahib
and Petrol Pump
8. Widening of Shankar Road
9. Schools (Manav Sthali,
Army Public, Springdales
and J. D. Tytler)
10. Talkatora Complex
11. Army Camp
12. Petrol Pump
13. Buddha Jayanti Park
14. Delhi Polo Ground
15. Army School HousingComplex
16. SITE
17. Shooting Range
18. Mahavir Jayanti Park
19. Residential Colonies
Source: Yeh Dilli Kiski Hai, Hazard Centre, November 2003, New Delhi
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
17/100
Delhis Watery Woes 5
of this major administrative and procedural lapse.
The impact of rapidly reducing green cover on
water availability is discussed later.
1.4. Delhi: Water in the PastRivers have been the cradles of civilisation
throughout the world and the history of Delhi too
is intrinsically intertwined with the Yamuna River.
Recently, an attempt has been made to rejuvenate
the Yamuna and its surroundings[3].
Ancient and mediaeval cities were built facing the
riverfront of Yamuna. Till the reign of Jala-ud-din
Khilji (1290-96) very dense forests surrounded
Delhi, implying the presence of abundant ground
water reserves with a high water table. During the
reign of Firoz Shah Tughlaq (1351-1388) hunting
reserves and pleasure resorts were constructed along
water harvesting dams. Shahjahan used to come
from Agra to Delhi by boat. The sandy banks near
the Red Fort were used in winter for elephant fights
and kite flying. They were also used for jharokha
darshan people coming to see the king on the
terrace of the Fort. An underground flight of steps
from the Fort would touch the riverbed and peopleundertook boating during the rainy season.
That Delhi had plenty of water in the past is
corroborated by a study conducted in 2000, which
discovered 15 water harvesting dams which define a
network of 25 water structures along forty miles of
the Delhi ridge from Zamrudpur and Tughlaqabad
in the south to Wazirabad on the Yamuna.
The antique map showing the Environs of Delhi
circa 1870, published by the Survey of India, also
testifies that before the beginning of the British
rule, a number of rivers and rivulets originating
from the ridge finally culminated in Yamuna
(Map 3). In addition to this, there were hundreds
of other water-bodies like wells, talabs, babris,
kunds and others. Recently, TAPAS, a Delhi-
based NGO, has prepared a list of more than
700 such water-bodies. Even today, 10 babris of
Delhi remain under the exclusive control of the
Archaeological Survey of India.
The Yamuna River is basically migrant in nature
and has been shifting its course eastward from
ancient times. In 1989, the Geological Survey of
India redrew the migration pattern of Yamuna in
parts of Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh [4], as shown
(Map 4). The newspaper offices at ITO (Income
Tax Office), Pragati Maidan and the surrounding
areas were once the floodplains of Yamuna, before
it shifted its course.
According to Anupam Mishra, a pioneer in traditional
water management practices, Hauz Khas used to be
the biggest talab (pond) in Delhi and Talkatora was
also a huge talab. There were large ponds in Patparganj,
Khureji, Khirki and other parts of Delhi, just 100-130
years back. Two rivers existed at Connaught Place.
Humayuns Tomb, Safdarjung and Old Fort were all
located along the banks of rivers. Where have all these
water-bodies vanished?
There is strong evidence to support that massive
urbanisation has resulted in the death of rivers
including the Yamuna. On comparing Map 3 (1807)
with the present map of Delhi (Map 5), one finds
that today all the then existing green areas have beencovered by extensive concrete structures, courtesy the
ever-increasing population of the city. It has virtually
killed the natural surface and sub-surface drainage
patterns of the area. Massive deforestation has led to
gradually reducing run-in, due to which parts of the
city get flooded during monsoons. Most of the roads
have been built directly on the drainage lines which
has further aggravated the problem.
There are other aspects of urbanisation too. According
to Census 2001, Delhi has a population of 137.8 lakhs
and in March 2001 there were 34.56 lakh vehicles
registered with the Transport Department of Delhi
Government. In March 2001, the total road network
in Delhi was 28,508 km. Between 1970-2001, the
increase of vehicles in Delhi has been 16 times from
2.14 lakhs to 34.56 lakhs, but the increase in road
network during the same period has been a mere
three times. In the IX Five Year Plan, 11 flyovers were
constructed whereas 45 new flyovers and 27 bridges
have been planned and approved for the coming
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
18/100
Introduction6
MAP 3
Water Channels Of Delhi
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
19/100
Delhis Watery Woes 7
MAP 4
Changing Course of Yamuna River
Present boundaries of river
Old channels of river flow
Locations of archaelogical
evidence
Change in direction of river flow
Boundaries of old river flow
channels
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
20/100
Introduction8
MAP 5
Present Map of Delhi
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
21/100
Delhis Watery Woes 9
years. In addition to this, massive digging work carried
out for the Delhi Metro, covering an area of 52 km,
has further affected the remaining natural drainage.
All this has played a part in the drying up of Yamuna
as the provenance of the river has become barren,
coupled with the destruction of upstream. As a result
there has been a massive reduction in the availability
of water throughout the river stretches in all the states.
In the wake of Delhi hosting Asian Games in 2011, a
massive concretisation exercise is scheduled to begin.
1.5. Current Sources of Water for DelhiTill 1955, there was no major outer source of water
in Delhi, as by and large, Yamuna was fulfilling the
requirements. As stated earlier, with the settlement
of large number of refugees from Pakistan, the water
shortage was felt for the first time in the fifties. Around
the same time the Bhakra Nangal dam (the first
temple of modem India - Nehru) was also completed
and became an important source in providing water
to Delhi and it continues to be so even today.
Over 86 percent of Delhis water supply comes from
surface water through the Yamuna river, whose flows
are largely diverted upstream in Punjab and Haryana
for canal irrigation. Other sources are HimalayanRivers, under various inter-state agreements, and sub-
surface sources like Ranney wells and tubewells, as
shown in Table 2.
Water for Delhi is released from Bhakra Nangal dam
to the town Tajewala (near Ambala) and it reaches
Munakh (Panipat) 70 km further down. Munakh
is the receiving point for the Delhi Jal Board. From
Munakh, it is the responsibility of DJB to take this
water to Delhi. Delhi Jal Board sends this water
to its two water treatment plants - Haidarpur
(130 km from Munakh) and Wazirabad (150 km
from Munakh). This transportation is facilitated
through the old Yamuna Nagar canal and Indira
Gandhi canal. This water is eventually supplied to
all other water treatment plants of Delhi, except
Bhagirathi.
The Bhagirathi water treatment plant, since 1990,
receives its 270 cusec water from the upper Ganges
through the Muradnagar canal covering a distance
of 28 km. This water takes care of the complete
water requirement of eastern Delhi and most of the
water requirement of south Delhi.
Thus, the water from two-mega water storage
dams, namely Bhakra Nangal, built primarily
on the pretext of irrigation, is being supplied to
Delhi and soon Tehri will follow suit. It may be
recalled here that since the last decade, the farmersfrom Punjab have been agitating against water
shortages. Similarly, farmers from Uttar Pradesh
are also against supplying water from Tehri dam to
Delhi, as it will adversely affect their share of water
availability. Incidentally, 40 percent of the electricity
from the Tehri hydroelectric power plant will also
be diverted to Delhi. In such a situation one cant
escape concluding that the real aim of such mega
water projects is mostly to fulfill the requirementsof urban centers, contrary to the declared project
objectives.
1.6. Present Water Requirements of Delhi At present the total water requirement of Delhi
stands at 3830 mld (million litres per day) and
has a shortfall of 880 mld. The total quantum of
water received in Delhi is 725 cusec from Haryana
and 270 cusec from the Ganges. However, there
has never been much demand on Delhis part to
increase its share from the Ganges and over the
S.
No.
Type Source Quantity
1.Surface
Water
Upper Yamuna River
Board
404 mgd
(1835
tcmd)
2.Surface
Water
Bhakra-Beas
Management Board
267 mgd
(1213
tcmd)
3. GroundwaterYamuna River
Ranney Wells
22 mgd
(101 tcmd)
4. Groundwater Tubewells acrossDelhi
41 mgd(187 (tcmd)
TABLE 2
Sources of Water for Delhi
Source: Delhi Jal Board
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
22/100
Introduction10
years this share has been, more or less, stabilised.
Moreover, this share will also be increased once
the Sonia Vihar water treatment plant becomes
functional, as it will be fed with the Ganges water.
However, the share with Uttar Pradesh too has
become a bone of contention, like Haryana.
Delhi has six functional water treatment plants
(Table 3) with an installed capacity of 560
mgd (million gallons per day) though the total
requirement of the city has been estimated to be
800 mgd. In addition to these, Sonia Vihar and
Nangloi water treatment plants, though completed,
are non-functional owing to lack of water.
continued throughout 1980. But the Haryana
government has expressed its inability to do so as
it was facing difficulty in fulfilling its own water
requirement for agriculture.
During these negotiations Haryana claimed that
it could only provide surplus 200 cusec water to
Delhi, once it starts getting surplus water from
neighbouring Punjab, after the completion of
the Satluj-Yamuna Link canal. Thus, the bilateral
dispute between Delhi and Haryana, in fact, has
been transformed into a trilateral issue between
Delhi-Haryana-Punjab.
However, the scenario was further compounded
and made murkier by the constant stubborn
refusal of Punjab to complete its portion of the
Satluj-Yamuna Link canal, aimed at providing
water to Haryana from Punjab. But Punjab has
taken a stand that there is no surplus water to
be provided to Haryana and its own farmers are
facing water shortage for their agricultural fields.
Thus the stalemate has continued for about 20
years. During 1978-1997, there were many
demonstrations, rallies and dharnas in Delhi over
this issue by farmers of Haryana and Punjab.Different political parties, religious organisations
and farmers unions organised these. In both
Punjab and Haryana, this has become a major
emotive issue and has been a key subject in the
electoral politics of these states. In Punjab all the
political parties are united in the stand of not
providing water to Haryana and in Haryana all
political parties are united on getting their share
of water from Punjab.
Exasperated with the pointless negotiations,
Delhi finally filed a case in the Supreme Court
in 1994, demanding its increased share of 800-
cusec from Haryana. Subsequently, before the
matter could be decided, Delhi and Haryana
alongwith Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan opted
for an out of court settlement, signing a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) under
which Delhi was ensured an uninterrupted
supply of 725 cusec.
S. No. Name Capacity
1.Wazirabad 120 mgd
2.Chandrawal 95 mgd
3.Haidarpur 200 mgd
4.Nangloi 40 mgd
5. Okhla 12 mgd
6.Bhagirathi 100 mgd
7.Sonia Vihar Lying idle since Dec 1994
8.Bawana Lying idle since Dec 2000
TABLE 3
Water Treatment Plants in Delhi
Note: All the first five treatment plants receive water from the Upper YamunaCanal and Western Yamuna Canal whereas the sixth plant, Bhagirathireceives water from the Ganges and Upper Ganga CanalSource: Delhi Jal Board
1.7. Hydro Politics of Water in DelhiThe water shortages in Delhi were first witnessed
in mid-1950s, after the settlement of refugees in
large numbers from Pakistan. At that time the
shortage was overcome by the supply of water
from the Bhakra Nangal dam. As the population
of Delhi continued to swell, the second round of
crisis was faced in late 1970s. At that time Delhi
was receiving 600 cusec water from Haryana. In
late 1970s, negotiations started with Haryana for
providing additional 200 cusec water to Delhi and
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
23/100
Delhis Watery Woes 11
On 17 July 2004, the then Chief Minister of
Haryana publicly threatened to nullify the Yamuna
Agreement in case the Central Government fails to
take stern action against Punjab [5]. Immediately
after this public pronouncement, the Chief Minister
of Delhi, addressing a press conference said that she
has approached the Prime Minister to protect the
interests of NCT of Delhi while resolving the crisis
arising out of the Punjab Assembly passing a law
terminating the 1981 trilateral agreement [6].
The Chief Minister of Delhi met with the Chief
Minister of Haryana and drew his attention to
the water crisis in Delhi. The Chief Minister of
Delhi categorically said to his counterpart that the
city needs water for domestic purposes, which is
allocated top priority in the national water policy
and hence water availability to Delhi must be
ensured. The same drama was once again enacted
in 2005 over the supply of water to Sonia Vihar
plant in Delhi and is covered in the relevant text.
To sum up, several factors have played a significant
role in precipitating a water crisis in the ever-
expanding city of Delhi vanishing forest cover,
massive urbanisation, swelling population, utter
neglect of river Yamuna, destruction of natural
surface and sub-surface drainage network, etc.
References
1. Forest Survey of India (2002). The Forest Mapping of India: 2001-2002. MOEF, Forest Survey of India,
Dehradun, Uttaranchal. 2002
2. News Item (2004). CBI raids Director Horticultures Premises in Delhi. Times of India. July 22, 2004
3. Shobha John and Rachna Subramaniam (2004). Finally a river may run through it. Times of India.
January 18, 2004
4. Arun Kumar Singh (1990). Yamuna - A Vagabond River. SROTE Science Features, August 19905. News Item (2004). Chautala threatens to nullify Yamuna Agreement. The Tribune. July 18, 2004
6. News Item (2004). CM asks PM to protect Delhis water interests. The Tribune. July 19, 2004
* * * * *
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
24/100
Water Rights and Delhi-Haryana Water Dispute1212
Before delving into the subject of water dispute, it will be relevant here to understandwater rights, which is an extremely complex subject involving individual rights,peoples rights, community rights, state rights and is often a bone of contention.
2.1 What are Water Rights?There are specific questions concerning the nature of rights, like:
Is it a natural (customary) right or a legal (positive) right (granted by law)?
Is it an individual right or a group right?
Is it a positive or negative right?
A natural right may arise in at least three ways:
granted by law, this would be a legal right, such as forest laws, where people are
given usufruct rights by the state to collect forest produce;
arising out of contract, such as under family laws, where both parties acquire certain
rights, in virtue of entering into a contract with one another; and
as a natural right arising out of either the very nature of human nature or society.
Traditionally, both individual and group rights over water were recognised in India.In fact, group rights of communities, castes or whole villages over tanks, ponds, wells,
streams or riverbanks were very common.
In positive rights, legally, there is an obligation on others to do something, and in
negative rights there is an obligation to refrain from doing something. Even if right to
water is assumed to be a natural right, the question still remains whether it is a positive
or negative right? Is it a positive right in which the state and other people (on whom
the corresponding duty falls) can be compelled to ensure that an individual is provided
with water? Or is it a negative kind of right in which state and other people merelyneed to keep away so that an individual can enjoy unfettered access to water? The
jurisprudential basis of negative rights has traditionally been the assumption:- that over
which (or for which) one has a negative right cannot be a subject matter for property.
Natural human life, for example, cannot be owned by anyone.
In this backdrop, a brief overview of the evolution of rights over water in India would
be relevant here.
2.2 Evolution of Water Rights in IndiaThe water law in India can be distinctly placed in four categories: ancient India,
British rule, post-independence and post WTO. A brief overview of these four periods
2. Water Rights and Delhi-Haryana Water Dispute
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
25/100
Delhis Watery Woes 1313
would be helpful in understanding the various
dimensions and complexities involved with the
water law. Obviously these customs and laws were
put in practice keeping the socio-economic realities
of the prevailing times in mind during all the four
periods.
Water in Ancient IndiaAny efficient system of management cannot be put
in practice without the sound knowledge about the
concerned area. Various processes of hydrological
cycle (evaporation, condensation, rainfall, stream-
flow etc.), as well as the fact that its conversion from
one form to another does not mean loss of water, were
well known during the Vedic period. Water intake
by plants, division of water into minute particles by
sunrays and wind, different types of clouds, their
heights, their rainfall capacities etc., along with
the prediction of rainfall quantity in advance by
observation of natural phenomena are illustrated in
the Puranas, Vrahat Samhita (550 AD),Meghmala
(900 AD) and other literature. There is reference
to rain gauges (varsha mapini) in Arthasastra of
Kautilya (also popularly known as Chanakya, 400
BC), andAstadhyayiof Panini (700 BC). Kautilya
also knew the quantity of rainfall in various partsof India. Indians were acquainted with the cyclonic
and orographic effects on rainfall, radiation and
convectional heating of earth. Various other
phenomena of infiltration, interception, stream-
flow, geomorphology, artesian wells and erosive
action of water were well understood. Ground-
water development and quality consideration were
getting sufficient attention as evidenced byVrahat
Samhita (550 AD). It was this vast knowledge, which formed the pillar of water management,
rights and cess system in ancient India.
The credit for evolving guidelines for scientific
water management and pricing system in ancient
India goes to KautilyasArthasastra. TheArthasastra
in 15 books (adhikaranas) presents 6000 verses
(slokas). The treatise also gives a vivid picture of
the water management practices of ancient India.
TheArthasastra is a treatise on statecraft, attributed
to Kautilya, the mentor of emperor Chandragupta
Maurya of India (321-297 BC). He gave
considerable importance to water management in
his work, since irrigated agriculture was one of the
main sources of revenue to the state. A critical study
of the Arthasastra brings to light the water law,
water pricing and responsibilities of the Irrigation
Department prevailing at that time in India.
It is evident from Arthasastra that the people of
ancient India have been familiar with the rainfall
distribution, soil classification and appropriate
irrigation practices for different agro-climatic
zones. The earliest mention of a rain gauge is found
in this work. It gives the details and dimensions
of the rain gauge and the locations where it has to
be installed. The rainfall data for certain locations
of the empire are furnished and depending on the
rainfall, the empire is divided into the wetlands and
dry lands. Certain principles have been prevalent
at that time to classify the land according to land
capability and land irrigability. Apart from the
traditional sources, man-made structures like tanks,
reservoirs and wells were used for irrigation. One of
Chandragupta Mauryas notable achievements was
the construction of a great irrigation lake calledSudarsana near Junagadh (Gujarat).
TheArthasastra brings out certain salient features
of the water law of the period. The upstream and
downstream water rights were well defined. For
example, a tank built downstream of an earlier
existing tank should not flood the fields irrigated
by the upper tank. A tank constructed upstream
should not deprive the downstream users. Thelaw stipulates not only fines but also emptying of
tanks for cases of violation. Exemption from tax
was given to those involved in the construction and
renovation of irrigation works. Fines were imposed
on those who let out water from dams out of turn,
and on those who obstructed the water allocated
to others. Fine was also imposed on those who
obstructed a customary watercourse.
The responsibilities of the Head of Irrigation
Department, according to theArthasastra, included
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
26/100
Water Rights and Delhi-Haryana Water Dispute1414
construction of irrigation systems and aiding others
involved in these activities. In waterless regions,
the government superintendents were in charge of
constructing wells and other water works.
The Arthasastra clearly talks about a water cess
over and above the normal land revenue levied
by the state on users of irrigation facilities. Even
those using their own private waterworks had to
pay some cess. The ownership of fish, ducks and
green vegetables in the irrigation works should go
to the king. It is interesting to note that the ancient
Indians had practiced scientific water management.
Their concepts pertaining to water law and pricing
have relevance even in modern times.
Subsequent rulers (from 321 BC-1857 AD), with
little alterations, followed the system of water pricing
and management devised by Kautilya, proving the
scientific basis in which they were rooted.
Water in British RuleWith the advent of British rulers, however, things
began to change, since the very nature of this rule
was different to generate revenue for the British
Empire rather the welfare of the common massesbeing ruled. An entire range of legislations over
water came into existence, like the Limitation Act of
1859, which was made explicit through easement in
water rights in its amendments in 1871, The Bengal
Canal Act 1864, The Bengal Ferries Act 1866,
The Bombay Inland Vessel Act 1868, The Punjab
Canals and Drainage Act 1871, The Northern
Indian Canal and Drainage Act 1873, The Bengal
Irrigation Act 1876, The Bombay Irrigation Act1879, Madras Rivers Conservancy Act 1884, and
many other similar acts. All these acts drastically
curtailed group rights and community rights, to a
large extent.
The coming of Easement Act 1882, made
the first radical shift in the history of Indian
Law, in both, recognising and not recognising
water rights as a negative natural right, as it has
contradictory provisions. Section 2, for the first
time, gave absolute right over rivers and lakes to
the government whereas Section 2 (6) of the same
act gives full recognition to natural and negative
customary rights, both for groups and individuals.
This act legitimises customary rights of the people
and provides two rules for recognition: by use or
prescription (Section 15) and by local customs
(Section 18). However, Section 4 of this act defines
easements for the first time as iura in re aliena, i.e.,
legal rights that can be alienated.
Similarly, riparian rights were also recognised under
the British law, in spite of these acts mentioned
above. The riparian rights as established by the
courts are as follows: A riparian owner has a right
to use the water of a stream flowing over his land
equally with other riparian owners, and to have the
water come to him undiminished in flow, quantity
or quality, and to go beyond his land without
obstruction. The existence of the fact that riparian
rights are natural rights was recognised by the Privy
Council [1] in 1932. The same fact was once again
recognised and established even after independence
by the Patna Court in 1954 [2]. Though in practice
it was difficult to implement uniformly, as not
many Indians had resources to approach the Privy
Council during the British Rule.
But in all fairness, it must be mentioned that the
Privy Council upheld no property rights of anyone,
in rivers, including the King [3].
Water in Independent IndiaIndia after independence, maintained almost the
same enactments, which were generated during
British rule. They were only amended or substitutedby newer ones, with the sole intention of further
strengthening states control over water, if needed.
Let us look at the existing provisions.
The Constitutional Rights The sovereign powers
of the state over natural water resources begin with
the Constitution. Entry 17, in the II List of the
Seventh Schedule places water at the disposal of
the states (state governments in Union of India).
This includes water supplies, irrigation, canals,
embankments, water storages and hydroelectric
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
27/100
Delhis Watery Woes 1515
power. This power is limited only by entry 56 of
List I, which gives power to the Center (Central
Government) for regulation and development of
inter-state rivers and river valleys, to the extent to
which such regulation and development under the
control of the Union is declared by the Parliament
by law to be expedient in the public interest. Entry
57, List I specifically mentions that the Union also
has the sole power to regulate fishing and fisheries
beyond territorial waters.
This control of the state over water emanates
from The Easement Act 1882, which recognises
the absolute right of the state and claims that no
perspective rights of easement can be claimed
against the government. The Preamble to this
Act does not explain why it became necessary to
vest this absolute right in the government. The
subsequent irrigation acts progressively affirmed
the states rights over water, be it in British India or
independent India.
Though technically speaking, water is a state
(government) subject and the Center has no role
except to intervene through Inter-State Water
Dispute Act by appointing a Tribunal in case ofa dispute arising between two or more states over
the use of water. However, in practical terms,
it is the Center, which decides the allocation of
development funds to different states under the
five-year plans and hence covertly controls the
development of water resources in the states. Such
an ambiguity arises primarily because of legal
position in this regard. In the face of water crisis
in many states, the Ministry of Water Resourcescame out with a proposal to withdraw water
from the concurrent list and bring it under the
exclusive fold of Center. However, preliminary
discussions with many states witnessed such fierce
opposition from all states that the proposal has
been put in cold storage.
Implied Rights There are other enactments
involving use of water, such as production of
electricity, water-ways, fisheries, food, recreation
etc. By implication, therefore, they give the
government rights over such use of water. Some of
these enactments are:
The Obstructing in Fairways Act, 1881
The Indian Ports Act, 1908
The Indian Electricity Act, 1910
The Steam Vessel Act, 1917
The Indian Forest Act [Section 26, 32(F)]
The Indian Mines Act, 1952 [Chapter V,
Section 19 (1)]
The Rajasthan Soil and Water Conservation
Act, 1964
In 1954, after the report of States Reorganisation
Committee, boundaries of most of the states were
redrawn and many new states came into existence.
With this, disputes between the riparian states
over sharing of water resources, began to surface.
Taking this into consideration, The Rivers Board
Act 1956 and Inter-State Water Dispute Act
1956 were enacted by the Parliament. The former
remained only on paper but the second act has
been in operation in resolving various disputes. In
addition to this, almost all the states have brought
in their own enactment on water resource within
their jurisdiction.
Summing up, it can be safely concluded that
practically all the rights over water for different uses
have been vested in the hands of government. The
process started with the British rule and continues
till today. In this framework, the public declaration
by the Irrigation Minister (now former minister)
that Every drop of rain belongs to the government!
Only the government has the right to collect the
rain [4] is merely a reflection of the arrogance ofthe state.
Water in the Era of Globalisation With the emergence of WTO in 1995, the
trade, economic, cultural and intellectual rights
have been redefined within the framework of
WTO legislation. It is mandatory for all WTO
members (at present 147) to reframe and re-orient
their municipal and national laws, policies and
programmes in congruence with WTO legislation.
WTO has both judicial and legislative authority, to
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
28/100
Water Rights and Delhi-Haryana Water Dispute1616
call for cancellation of national or municipal laws
of any country, which are not in conformity with
the WTO legislation and if they can be successfully
shown to be trade restrictive. Any failure in
compliance on this count, will lead to penalty
of cross retaliation through discriminatory trade
measures at the hands of the other members. It has
its own dispute settling mechanism alongwith an
appellate body, whose decision is final. Thus WTO
has emerged as a very powerful body the likes of
which world has never seen.
Legal foundation of trade in water was laid in 1947,
when GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade) in its definition of tradable goods clearly lists
waters, including natural and artificial waters.
In an explanatory note, it further adds, Ordinary
natural waters of all kinds (other than sea water)
is included in this category. Article XI of GATT
Rules specifically mentioned No country is
allowed to prohibit the export of a tradable good.
WTO retained these same provisions of water in
relation to trade.
WTO also included water in its GATS (General
Agreement on Trade in Services) category and thereare various services under this regime covering
water, like, fresh water services (read supply),
sewer services, wastewater treatment, construction
of water pipes, waterways, tankers, groundwater
assessment, irrigation, dams, water transport services
and many more. This has resulted in opening the
gates for foreign companies in these areas, which
were hitherto city municipalities responsibilities.
Moreover, if water and waterbodies in natural stateare explicitly brought under the GATS regime as
the recent proposals of EU (2003) have asked, then
it would lead to the complete control of MNCs over
waterbodies. And this process will be irreversible
since under the GATS rules, once a public service
has been privatised, it must remain a commercial
utility. Still worse, it has also been proposed to bring
water under the investment category, and if done
so, MNCs will be in a position to demand funds
from the government for development activities,
like any other government department. A greater
discussion on this issue is not possible here and
those interested may refer to the authors published
work in this regard [5].
India was one of the first nations to become a member
of the WTO on 31 December 1995 itself, on its
first day of existence. It was therefore mandatory for
India to redraft its National Water Policy making it
congruent with the WTO legislation. So National
Water Policy 2002 was enacted, substituting the
earlier NWP 1987, though it has nothing new to
offer, except one point. A new para was inserted,
as follows:
Private Sector Participation. 13. Private sector
participation should be encouraged in the various
aspects of planning, development and management ofthe water resource projects for diverse uses, wherever
feasible. Private sector participation may help in
introducing innovative ideas, generating financial
resources and introducing corporate management in
improving service efficiency and accountability to
users. Depending upon specific situations, various
combinations of private sector participation, in
building, owning, operating, leasing and transferring
of water resource facilities, may be considered.(Emphasis original)
There is another angle to the inclusion of water in
WTO, where it is considered as a need. United
Nations, since its inception has been very clear
that water is a human right through its various
covenants, protocols, declarations and resolutions.
These are: Convention on the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights(1966), Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination
(1967); Universal Declaration on the Eradication
of Hunger and Malnutrition (1974), Declaration
on the Right to Development (1986), Convention
on the Rights of the Child (1989), to name a few. It
is very concerned over the manner in which water
is considered merely as an economic and tradable
good, overlooking social and cultural aspects related
with water. Recently, the Committee on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights (2003) has come out
with the most hard-hitting 60-point document [6]
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
29/100
Delhis Watery Woes 1717
establishing that water is a human right subject.
United Nations in many of its reports, from time to
time, has been raising its voice against the policies
of international financial institutions for violating
these rights.
It is in this larger framework that the issue of rights of
water should be perceived. It is evident that peoples
rights over water, as they stand today, are extremely
diluted and the state is the sole custodian of these
rights, in the name of the people. This continues
in spite of the fact that the Supreme Court has
explicitly reinterpreted Article 21 (a fundamental
right in Constitution, known as the right to life)
to include right to environment and hence right to
clean water, as a fundamental right. This has been
recorded in the Supreme Court judgment given in
Dehradun Valley and pollution cases and others [7,
8]. Another significant point deserving attention is
the issue of rights over groundwater, which assumes
greater significance in times of water crisis.
2.3 Groundwater RightsThe importance of groundwater can be gauged
from the fact that Groundwater accounts for more
than 95 percent of all the fresh water availableon Earth at any given moment [9]. Yet there is
no groundwater law in India at the national level
and consequently groundwater has been exploited
beyond all levels of imagination. Groundwater
rights in India are attached and linked with land
rights, i.e, whoever owns the land, owns the
groundwater too. This is a completely unscientific
way of defining groundwater right since boundaries
of a groundwater aquifer do not follow surfaceboundaries.
Groundwater is one of the most exploited resources
in the country and evidence strongly suggests that
the phenomenal growth of agriculture has been
laid on the foundation of groundwater. It is best
corroborated in the case of Punjab where it is a
common misconception that the Bhakra dam has
ushered in the green revolution but, the fact is that
except for the first decade after the construction of
the Bhakra dam, more and more farmers shifted
to groundwater use, resulting in a sharp decline
of the water table. This trend was noticed first
in mid-1980s. By 1988, out of 12 total districts
in the state, in six districts withdrawals exceeded
recharge, namely Amritsar, Sangrur, Jalandhar,
Patiala, Kapurthala and Ludhiana [10]. By 1990s,
major parts of 11 districts out of 12 fell into the
category of dark zones [11]. As per the recent
official data situation has gone from bad to worse
in 2000, out of a total of 118 Blocks in Punjab,
62 fall under over-exploited category and 8 fall
under Dark Zones [12]. Paradoxically, owing to
liberal use of water for irrigation 2.86 lakh hectare
land is waterlogged in Punjab [13].
The over-exploitation of groundwater throughout
the country is manifested by the fact that in 286
districts across 18 states in India, the water table has
fallen by four meters in the last two decades [14]
and many coastal states like Andhra Pradesh, Tamil
Nadu, Maharashtra and Gujarat are on the verge
of massive saline intrusion owing to indiscriminate
extraction of groundwater. Concerned over it,
the Central Government has prepared a Model
Groundwater (Control and Regulation) Bill and
circulated to the states to come with an Act forgroundwater development [15] since water is a
state subject. The salient features of this bill are:
Groundwater has been defined as the water,
which exists below the surface of the ground at
any particular point.
Groundwater Authority should be constituted
by the state.
The state government, on a report received
from the Groundwater Authority may declareareas as notified areas, where extraction and use
of groundwater will be regulated in the Publics
interest.
Any person desiring to sink a well in the notified
area for any purpose other than exclusive
domestic use, either on personal or community
basis, shall apply to the Groundwater Authority
for the grant of a permit for the purpose and
shall not proceed with any activity connected
with the sinking unless a permit has been
granted by the Groundwater Authority.
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
30/100
Water Rights and Delhi-Haryana Water Dispute1818
In granting or refusing a permit the Groundwater
Authority shall have regard to:
a) The purpose or purposes for which water is
to be used;
b)The existence of other competitive users;
c)The availability of water, and
d)Any other relevant factor.
Every existing user of groundwater in the
notified area shall apply to the Groundwater
Authority for the grant of a certificate of
registration recognising his existing use in
such forms and in such manners as may be
prescribed.
No person shall himself or by any person on his
behalf, carry on the business of sinking wells or
any other activity connected with the sinking
of wells in any notified area except under and
in accordance with a license granted in this
behalf.
Any person desiring to carry on the business of
sinking of wells or any other activity connected
with the sinking of wells in any notified area
may make an application to the Groundwater
Authority for the purpose.
The Groundwater Authority or any person
authorised by it in writing in this behalfshall have the power to enter any property
with the right to investigate and make any
measurements concerning the land or the
water located on the surface or underground,
inspect the well, sunk or being sunk, take
specimen of such solid, or other materials
or of water extracted from such wells, and
obtain such information and record as may be
required. Any user of groundwater, who contravenes
or fails to comply with any of the provisions
of the Act, will be penalised and/or punished
according to the provision of the Act.
However, most of the states have failed to introduce
an enactment on groundwater and have rather
preferred to draft their own model groundwater
bill. Let us look at the experiences of Rajasthan, a
perennially parched state, in this regard.
Experiences of Rajasthan With ModelGroundwater BillThe Rajasthan government introduced a Model
Groundwater Bill, drawn on the lines of the Model
Bill circulated by Center, more than a decade ago.
However the implementation of the bill in the state
has been pathetic, to say the least.
According to a recent report [16], Rajasthan has
4.8 lakh wells, 9 lakh bore wells, and 20,000 very
deep wells in operation. On an average, these
13,80,000 wells are over-drawing annually 950
crore cubic meter water, against an annual recharge
capacity of only 715.5 crore cubic meter water.
Thus the withdrawals exceed 33 percent more than
the recharge capacity. In spite of this, out of 237
total Blocks of Rajasthan, 177 are facing severe
water scarcity, out of which 56 Blocks have been
declared dark zones. In the last decade, successive
governments have tried to bring out legislation
to curb these practices but powerful lobbies have
thwarted all such efforts. The long-term disastrous
consequences of it are easy to visualise.
Summing up, there is an urgent need to bring
out a national legislation on groundwater as thefuture scenario looks bleak and there is an even
stronger need to reform water laws in the country
in congruence with the unfolding water crisis,
which is anticipated to worsen in the days to
come. The time has come, long overdue in fact, to
define explicitly and legally the enforceable water
entitlements, at all levels, including personal. In
this background, let us look at the water disputes
concerning Delhi.
2.4 Yamuna River and Delhi-Haryana-Uttar Pradesh TriangleThe stretch of Yamuna River from its origin to
Delhi is called the Upper Yamuna river involving
the other basin states of Himachal Pradesh,
Haryana, Delhi, Uttaranchal and Rajasthan.
However, the states of Haryana and Uttar Pradesh
play a crucial role so far as water availability in
Delhi is concerned. There have been a series of
agreements between the involving states, each newer
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
31/100
Delhis Watery Woes 1919
one nullifying the preceding one. The most recent
UP-Haryana-Rajasthan-HP-Delhi Memorandum
of Understanding (MoU) in this regard is the Upper
Yamuna Agreement on May 1994 [Annexure 1].
This agreement takes note of maximisation of use
of the surface flows of the Yamuna River by a series
of identified storage projects on Yamuna, upstream
of Tajewala, which are already existing. The Upper
Yamuna Board (established under the Yamuna River
Agreement) is already fully functional to monitor the
implementation of this agreement. An interesting fact
regarding this agreement is that the total demands of
the basin states is over three times than the quantum of
flow available in the river. Obviously, these demands
are based on political grounds.
The agreement deals with the established irrigation
needs of Uttar Pradesh and Haryana and Municipal
and Industrial needs of Delhi and Rajasthan. Uttar
Pradesh and Haryana can otherwise withdraw all
the water upstream of Delhi for irrigation. It will
be pertinent to the water related disputes among
these three states, namely, Punjab, Haryana and
Rajasthan since Haryana-Delhi water dispute is
intertwined with it.
2.5 The Ravi-Beas Water Dispute:Haryana-PunjabThe state of Haryana, bifurcated from Punjab in
1966, mainly has an agrarian economy and its water
demands are ever increasing. Haryana, as a part of
Punjab till 1966, was already receiving water from
the Bhakra dam and after coming into existence
as an independent state, it continued to receive
the same quantum of water. As the water-needsof Haryana grew, with expansion of agriculture,
Haryana started demanding more water from Ravi-
Beas rivers, giving birth to a long-standing water-
sharing dispute with Punjab. There are claims and
counter-claims of Haryana and Punjab over the
rights to water from the Bhakra Nangal dam and
Ravi-Beas rivers.
Even a 20 year long negotiation has failed to find a
satisfactory solution. It will be relevant to mention
here that at present Haryana is already getting 4.33
MAF water from the Satluj and 1.62 MAF from
the Ravi-Beas rivers at present.
On December 31, 1981, Mrs. Indira Gandhi, the
then Prime Minister, succeeded in bringing out a
trilateral Ravi-Beas Agreement between the then
Chief Ministers of Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan
over sharing of water from Ravi-Beas rivers. The
construction of Satluj-Yamuna Link (SYL) was
proposed under this contractual obligation of
1981, in order to take water to Haryana. Under
this agreement, Bhakra-Beas Management Board
was to release 100 mgd of water from Ravi and
Bead rivers for Delhi.
In July 1985, an agreement between Rajiv Gandhi,
the then Prime Minister and H. S. Longowal,
the then Chief Minister of Punjab was signed
covering the Ravi-Beas waters. It was under this
agreement that a Tribunal was set up in April 1986
to adjudicate the claims of these two conflicting
states. Justice Balakrishna Eradi, then Supreme
Court Judge, headed this Tribunal, which after
listening to the arguments of both the parties
over the claims of Ravi-Beas waters submitted its
interim report in January 1987. The final report ofthe Tribunal, supposed to be delivered within six
months, remains to be delivered till date.
According to the interim report of the Eradi Tribunal
in 1987, from the Ravi-Beas river systems, 5 MAF
(million acre feet) water is allocated to Punjab
and 3.83 MAF to Haryana. It further reiterated
that water to Haryana will be facilitated by the
construction of a 305 km long Satluj-Yamuna Linkcanal, originally envisaged in the 1981 agreement,
out of which 91 km lies in Haryana and 214 km
in Punjab.
2.6 The Satluj-Yamuna Link (SYL):Haryana-Punjab
After the trilateral agreement of 1981, the
construction of the Satluj-Yamuna Link canal
(in Punjab) started only in 1982. However, after
some time, there was strong opposition to the
construction of the Satluj-Yamuna Link canal
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
32/100
Water Rights and Delhi-Haryana Water Dispute2020
in Punjab and it was stopped. Meanwhile, after
the award of the Eradi Tribunal, Haryana has
completed the construction of the portion of
the Satluj-Yamuna Link canal-falling within its
territory by 1987. Once again, after a gap of eight
years, the construction of the Satluj-Yamuna Link
in Punjab was restarted during the 1990-91, for a
very brief period, during which militancy was at its
peak in the state. The work was once again stopped
after the Chief Engineer of the Satluj-Yamuna Link
canal was assassinated. It may be recalled that many
workers of the Satluj-Yamuna Link canal have been
gunned down during the years of militancy.
Haryana, exasperated over the long delay in
the completion of the Satluj-Yamuna Link by
Punjab, in 1989, approached the Supreme Court
to expedite the completion of the Satluj-Yamuna
Link canal so that it can get water at the earliest.
Haryana claims to spend Rs. 820 crores so far on
its construction. But Punjab has refused to build
the section of the project within its territory and
so the Satluj-Yamuna Link canal carries no water.
During the past twenty years, not a days work has
been done on this.
The Supreme Court has given deadlines, seven
times to finish the completion of the Satluj-
Yamuna Link canal December 1983, August
1986, December 1987, June 1989, January 1991,
January 2002 and finally January 2003. On
January 15, 2002 the Supreme Court ordered
Punjab to finish the work on the canal within a
year, failing which, it said, the Union Government
would have to undertake the work. Punjab hasignored all these warnings, so far.
In the meantime Punjab again filed a legal
intervention in this case, giving the argument that it
has no surplus water to release to Haryana. It states
that the 1985 Rajiv Gandhi-Longowal agreement
was intended to end the terrorist activities in the
state and this is a key component for the release of
water into the Satluj-Yamuna Link canal. And so
the deadlock continues.
In this ongoing bitter litigation, the Supreme
Court, in 2003, once again, issued a directive to
the Punjab government to complete the Satluj-
Yamuna Link canal within one year but this too
failed to make any change in Punjabs position.
Repeated failure of the Punjab government in
complying with the directives of the Supreme
Court led to the passing of a stricture against the
Punjab Chief Minister by the Supreme Court
in 2003 and imposing a fine of Rs. 10,000 on
the Punjab Government. In addition, a case of
contempt of court is also ongoing against the
present Chief Minister of Punjab.
In May 2004, the Supreme Court, finally taking
note of the repeated failures of the Punjab
government to comply with its order, directed the
Central government to undertake the completion
of the Satluj-Yamuna Link canal and ensure its
completion within a year. The Supreme Court
specifically directed the Punjab government to
hand over the section of SYL falling under its
territory to the Central Public Works Department
(CPWD) of the Central government.
The Punjab government publicly declared that it would appeal to the full bench of the Supreme
Court against this decision of the 3-member
bench. The Punjab government has already made
consultations with its lawyers, including the
Constitutional expert, Mr. Fali S. Nariman.
Once again the farmers of Punjab have taken
to the roads against this verdict of the Supreme
Court. The main political party in opposition inthe state, Akali Dal, accused the ruling Congress
government of failing to present its case properly in
the Supreme Court, thereby failing to protect the
interests of the farmers of Punjab and demanded
its resignation. The President of the Akali Dal
publicly declared that he would not allow a single
drop of water to be diverted from Punjab to
Haryana. In response, the Punjab Chief Minister
too also made a public declaration that as long as
he is in power, not a drop of water will be given to
Haryana at the cost of farmers of the state.
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
33/100
Delhis Watery Woes 2121
It will be relevant to state here that all political
parties are united on the issue of not diverting
water to Haryana. To counter the directive of the
Supreme Court, just two days before the deadline
of handing over the Satluj-Yamuna Link section
to CPWD, the Punjab Chief Minister called a
special session of the state Assembly on July 12,
2004. In this session The Punjab Termination of
Agreements Bill, 2004 was passed unanimously,
thereby annulling the December 1981 Trilateral
Agreement, under which the Satluj-Yamuna Link
was planned to be constructed. All other pacts
related to Ravi-Beas water, with Haryana and
Rajasthan, also stood terminated under this Bill.
The Chief Minister, justifying the Bill, stated in
the Assembly It is a well-settled law that the
legislature is competent to remove, or take away
the basis of a judgment by law, and thereby, it does
not encroach upon the power of the judiciary.
Emphasising the necessity for such a Bill, he
stated that the terms of the 1981 Agreement
have become onerous, unfair, unreasonable and
contrary to the interests of the inhabitants of Ravi-
Beas basin. The Chief Minister of Punjab further
stated that Haryana and Rajasthan are neitherriparian nor basin states, but have been utilising
Ravi-Beas water and Punjab accepted this, as the
Clause 5 of the Bill protects the existing usage
of water from Ravi-Beas. Moreover, the Bill also
has a safeguard as it exclusively mentions - No
civil court shall have jurisdiction to entertain
any suit or proceedings in respect of any matter
arising under or connected with this Act. It will
be relevant to mention here that Punjab is yet tocomplete the work in 121 km (out of 214 km in
its territory), including Sirsa Aqueduct.
Since then, the Chief Ministers of Haryana and
Rajasthan have met the incumbent Prime Minister
demanding justice in this matter. The Central
government, on its part, has also requested the
Supreme Court to issue fresh guidelines in the wake
of this development. The Members of Parliament
from Haryana and Rajasthan have also approached
the President of India to intervene in this issue and
the President has also asked for the opinion of the
Supreme Court.
2.7 The Constitutional CrisisThe Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004,
on a cursory look, appears to be a violation of
the constitutional provisions regarding sharing of
river waters between the states. The Constitution
clearly states that the sole responsibility of
resolving all bilateral disputes in sharing water
from riparian rivers rests with the Union of India.
In such a case any concerned state, be it Punjab,
Haryana or Rajasthan, is simply not competent
to make an existing agreement null and void
unilaterally.
In this regard, the role of the Governor of Punjab
is also questionable. The Governor, by signing
an Act, contrary to the Constitutional provisions
has acted in a hurry and it would have been
more appropriate for him to send this Bill to the
President of India for reference. Incidentally, the
then incumbent Governor was an appointee of
the earlier BJP led NDA-coalition government.
So far as Rajasthans share of water from the riversof Punjab is concerned, it primarily originates
from the Indus Treaty between India and Pakistan
wherein, the Indian claim contained water for
Rajasthan. Inclusion of Rajasthan in subsequent
inter-state water agreements over rivers of Punjab
is done on this ground. If the Punjab Termination
of Agreements Act, 2004, is made applicable to
Rajasthan then it also implies the nullification of
the Indus Treaty. In such a situation, is the PunjabAssembly the competent legislative authority to
address an international agreement?
A similar development in the past with regard
to Karnataka-Tamil Nadu dispute over sharing
of water from the Cauvery river can be cited
here, as it sheds light on the line of reasoning
by the Supreme Court. In 1991, the Karnataka
government passed a legislation rejecting the
award given by the Cauvery Tribunal asking
Karnataka to release 205 TMC water to Tamil
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
34/100
Water Rights and Delhi-Haryana Water Dispute2222
Nadu. The Supreme Court rejected this legislation
by terming it unconstitutional. The situation
in Punjab is quite analogous, as Punjab too has
rejected diversion of water to Haryana, as per
the award of the Eradi Commission. Only time
will tell whether the Supreme Court will apply
the same principle to The Punjab Termination of
Agreements Act, 2004, held by it 13 years ago.
Though there are minority voices of sanity in
Punjab, advising the government to comply
with the directive of the Supreme Court, by and
large the political and general mood remains in
favour of non-diversion of water to Haryana.
The Punjab Termination of Agreements Act,
2004, rocked the Parliament, in both upper
and lower houses. Members of Parliament from
Haryana and Rajasthan, demanding immediate
intervention of the central government, didnt
allow any work in the Parliament, till the Prime
Minister himself made a statement on this
issue promising to protect the interests of the
concerned states.
It has been argued that perhaps the legal ambiguity
in which water rights exist is responsible for thenon-compliance of the Supreme Court order, but
it seems unlikely. It appears to be a case of populist
policies and appeasement of voters within the
state. It is corroborated by the fact that in the
wake of electricity reforms, Punjab government
has recently declared that it would continue
supplying free electricity to farmers and would
bear the bill. This would mean a loss of Rs. 1200
crores annually for the Punjab government.
2.8. Arguments put forth by Punjab andHaryanaIt will be relevant here to briefly view the arguments
given by these two states, which are at loggerheads
with each other. The Punjab government filed a
complaint with the Water Resource Ministry in
this regard on January 13 2004, in which it has
presented its position. This contains the same
points, which Punjab has presented to the Supreme
Court, as summarised below.
Punjabs rationale1. Over the last twenty years, there has been a
substantial decline in the availability of surplus.
The total quantum of water in Ravi Beas has
reduced from 17.17 MAF to 14.37 MAF
(1985-2004) and this reduction is consistent,
continuous and constant. It is corroborated by
the river flow data obtained from the Bhakra-
Beas Management Board.
2. Even without the completion of Satluj Yamuna
Link canal, Haryana is already getting 2.62
MAF through the Bhakra main line (Haryana
was receiving this quantum of water as part of
Punjab till 1966, and continued to receive the
same quantum after becoming an independent
state).
3. Punjab has contested the claim of the Center
placing the Indus basin and Yamuna basin as
analogous, in terms of being water surplus
basins. It has alleged that the Indus basin
covering Punjab is a water-deficient basin
whereas the Yamuna basin covering Haryana is
a water surplus basin. Since water can only be
transferred from a surplus basin to a deficient
basin, Punjab cant transfer water to Haryana.
4. In the meantime, Haryana faced with waterscarcity has helped itself through several
measures. It has signed MOUs with Uttar
Pradesh, Rajasthan and Delhi in May 1994 for
the allocation of Yamuna water and received
4.65 MAF out of the 9.73 MAF of Yamuna
waters.
5. Haryana will also benefit from the Sharda-
Yamuna link for which an agreement has been
signed between India and Nepal.6. If Punjab diverts water to Haryana, about 16
lakh acres of land in Muktsar, Bhatinda and
Mansa districts would be rendered barren and
infertile.
7. The constant reduction in the quantum of
water flow in Ravi-Beas has made the Eradi
Tribunal irrelevant and hence it should be
scrapped completely.
8. The Punjab-Haryana water dispute should
be addressed by appointing a fresh Tribunal
under Section 4(1) of the Inter State Water
-
8/6/2019 Delhi's Watery Woes
35/100
Delhis Watery Woes 2323
Dispute Act 1956. Punjab has also pointed
out that Section 4(2) of the Act provides that
only existing judges of the Supreme Court or
the High Court could be nominated on the
Tribunal. Therefore this matter could not be
referred to the Eradi Tribunal. Moreover, the
Eradi Tribunal was formed for a limited purpose
for adjucating matters contained in the Rajiv-
Longowal Accord of July 24, 1985.
9. In 1984, the Punjab State Assembly declared
inter-state agreement, Reorganisation Act 1966,
invalid and also approached the Supreme Court
challenging the validity of the Reorganisation
Act 1966. It may be recalled that it was under
this Act that the water of the riparian states were
to be divided [However, Punjab withdrew this
legal intervention, after a tripartite agreement
between Punjab-Haryana-Rajasthan in 1985].
Haryanas rationaleHaryana has its own line of reasoning, as given
below.
1. Haryana is legally entitled to get water from
Satluj and Beas since the Reorganisation Act
1966 empowers the Center to divide the waterof the Satluj and Beas river systems if both the
states do not arrive at a mutually acceptable
solution.
2. Haryana is diverting 725 cusec water to Delhi,
which is affecting its agriculture. This has
aggravated since 1997 when Haryana has had to
increase its allocation to Delhi from 600 to 725
cusec. This is being done as per the Haryana-
Delhi bilateral agreement, as the bulk of watersupply for Delhi is received from Haryana (the
related agreements have been discussed latter in
this text).
3. The contention that the Yamuna basin is water
surplus basin is wrong, as the Yamuna basin too
is a water deficient basin.
4. Haryana strongly objects to the constitution of
any new Tribunal for resolving its dispute with
Punjab. It firmly believes that the issue has been
satisfactorily resolved and the only bottleneck
that remains is in the implementation of the
Eradi Tribunals decision to allocate 3.83 MAF
at the earliest. Haryana believes that Punjabs
plea to appoint a new Tribunal is merely a
delaying tactic, especially when the Eradi
Tribunal has already given its verdict in this
dispute.
5. The Sharda-Yamuna link will take a long time
to complete, if at all it is ever completed, taking
the acrimonious relations of India and Nepal in
the water sharing arrangements into account,
whereas the need for water is immediate.
Thus, both Haryana and Punjab continue to be
at loggerheads over the share of water from the
Himalayan rivers, eventually affecting the share of
water received by Delhi.
[This section on dispute is largely reconstructed
on the basis of newspaper reports, specifically
The Tribune and Punjab Kesari, as well as
meetings with lawyers representing Punjab and
Haryana Governments in the ongoing Supreme
Court litigation. Both the concerned parties have
requested that documents not be photocopied, as
the case is politically sensitive but had no objectionto relevant portions being noted down.]