Introduction:

In a heated courtroom exchange on June 13, 2024, the Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) and the State of Haryana clashed over the critical issue of water supply to the crisis-hit capital. The GNCTD, represented by Senior Advocate AM Singhvi, brought forward serious allegations regarding the illegal siphoning of water by the so-called “tanker mafia” operating on the Haryana side of the Yamuna River. The case, heard by a Vacation Bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Prasanna B Varale, underscored the severe water shortage faced by Delhi amidst a punishing heatwave affecting northern India.

Delhi Government’s Arguments:

The GNCTD, in its status report, highlighted the operational activities of the “tanker mafia” on the Haryana side of the Yamuna River, suggesting that this illicit group was responsible for significant water pilferage before it reached Delhi’s supply points, namely the CLC and DSB. The Delhi government emphasized its lack of jurisdiction over these activities, placing the onus on Haryana to ensure the full supply of water from the release point to the receipt point. The GNCTD pleaded for immediate intervention by the Haryana authorities and stringent measures by the Haryana and Delhi Police at their respective borders to curb the illegal activities. Singhvi vehemently argued that severe penalties, even suggesting the death penalty, should be considered for those involved in the water theft, asserting that decisive action against a few would deter others.

Haryana Government’s Response:

The Haryana government, while acknowledging the water crisis, contended that it had been releasing water as per the agreements and expectations. It suggested that the responsibility for any discrepancies in water supply should also consider the internal distribution mechanisms within Delhi. Haryana expressed its willingness to cooperate but underscored the complexities involved in water sharing between states, often exacerbated by natural and logistical challenges.

Court’s Judgment:

After thorough deliberation, the Vacation Bench acknowledged the severity of the water crisis and the need for immediate action. However, it recognized the limitations of judicial intervention in the technical and sensitive issue of inter-state water sharing. Consequently, the Court directed the GNCTD to approach the Upper Yamuna River Board (UYRB) for a resolution, emphasizing that the board, constituted through an inter-state agreement in 1994, was best equipped to handle such matters.

The Bench ordered the Delhi government to file an application for an additional 150 cusecs of water on humanitarian grounds by the end of the day. It instructed the UYRB to convene a meeting promptly to address the application and consider holding daily meetings if necessary until the issue was resolved. The Court underscored the urgency and humanitarian aspect of the matter, emphasizing that the UYRB’s expertise was crucial for a sustainable solution.