📷 Image: Wikimedia Commons / Rsin2016
Politics
Punjab Refuses to Yield SYL Canal Water, Haryana Insists on Its Share
✍️ The Indian Express
🗓 29 Aug 2026, 09:53 AM
👁 2
Punjab remains firm on not releasing water from the Sutlej‑Yamuna Link canal, while Haryana continues to press for its allocated share, heightening the long‑running inter‑state dispute.
The long‑standing dispute over the Sutlej‑Yamuna Link (SYL) canal has entered another tense phase as Punjab officials reiterated their refusal to release water to the canal, citing concerns over the state’s own irrigation needs. Haryana’s water department, however, has publicly affirmed that the state will not back down from its claim to the water share allotted by earlier court orders, warning that any delay could affect its agricultural sector.
The disagreement dates back to a 2002 Supreme Court directive that mandated Punjab to supply a fixed volume of water to the SYL canal, which would then feed Haryana’s water‑scarce regions. Punjab’s leadership argues that the mandated flow exceeds the state’s current river availability, especially after recent low monsoon inflows, and that compliance would jeopardise its own farmers.
Haryana’s representatives counter that the canal is essential for meeting the water demands of its districts, particularly in the Rohtak and Jind regions, and that the state is prepared to pursue legal recourse if Punjab’s stance persists. Both states have hinted at possible political negotiations, but no concrete timetable has emerged.
The stalemate has drawn attention from the central government, which has urged both parties to resolve the issue amicably to avoid further strain on inter‑state relations and on the broader water‑security agenda of northern India.
The disagreement dates back to a 2002 Supreme Court directive that mandated Punjab to supply a fixed volume of water to the SYL canal, which would then feed Haryana’s water‑scarce regions. Punjab’s leadership argues that the mandated flow exceeds the state’s current river availability, especially after recent low monsoon inflows, and that compliance would jeopardise its own farmers.
Haryana’s representatives counter that the canal is essential for meeting the water demands of its districts, particularly in the Rohtak and Jind regions, and that the state is prepared to pursue legal recourse if Punjab’s stance persists. Both states have hinted at possible political negotiations, but no concrete timetable has emerged.
The stalemate has drawn attention from the central government, which has urged both parties to resolve the issue amicably to avoid further strain on inter‑state relations and on the broader water‑security agenda of northern India.