Water Wars in North India: The Bhakra-Nangal Project and Interstate Tensions

By: Shreya Maheshwari Goel

Water-sharing is a contentious issue not only at the international level—evident in the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty following the Pahalgam attack—but also domestically and regionally, as India's states are vying for shared water resources.

The Supreme Court, last Tuesday, instructed both the Haryana and Punjab states to cooperate with the Centre to resolve the water dispute amicably. If the issue remains unresolved, the bench will then take up the matter on 13th August.

What’s the dispute?

The dispute began on 23rd April when Punjab declined to provide Haryana with an extra 4,500 cusecs of water through the Bhakra-Nangal project. Citing a serious drinking water deficit in its western districts, Haryana requested 8,500 cusecs of water from the Bhakra-Nangal project, which was 4,500 cusecs more than its typical allocation.

AAP-ruled Punjab refused to provide BJP-ruled Haryana extra water, saying that Haryana had used 103 per cent of its allocated share of water by March and that any additional supply to Haryana would come at the cost of Punjab’s own pressing needs.

Punjab maintains that the state doesn't have any extra water to share and needs it for the upcoming paddy planting season. The Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB), which oversees the water distribution throughout Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh, and Delhi, then took up the issue.

With member states Haryana, Rajasthan, and Delhi voting in favour, Himachal Pradesh abstaining, and Punjab voting against, the BBMB ruled in favour of Haryana's proposal. But instead of following the BBMB's ruling, Punjab passed a resolution condemning the Dam Safety Act and opposing the provision of more water to Haryana. Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann vowed not to spare a drop of water from Punjab's share for the neighbouring state.

Bhakra-Nangal Project and the row between the two states:

The Bhakra-Nangal project, a river valley project, provides potable water, flood control, hydropower production, and irrigation. In addition to being a significant source of hydroelectric power through the Bhakra Power Houses I and II, the system is essential for supplying agricultural water to areas like Punjab, Haryana, and Rajasthan.

The row between the two states over water started after Haryana was carved out from the then joint Punjab in 1966. Following the 1966 reorganisation of Punjab, which resulted in the creation of Haryana and Himachal Pradesh, the Bhakra Management Board was established to oversee the allocation of water among the newly formed states.

The Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) Canal was proposed to facilitate water distribution. However, political pressure caused Punjab to halt canal construction, and in 2004, it passed a law that terminated all prior water arrangements. Despite the Supreme Court’s ruling that this termination was unconstitutional, the implementation process remains stalled.

The Way Ahead:

Water-sharing remains a contentious issue—not only at the international level but also within India, where states often compete over shared resources. Measures like suspending water flow, which are used against hostile nations like Pakistan, should not be mirrored in inter-state conflicts within India.

Punjab’s refusal to share water with Haryana is not only a politically charged move, rather it reflects a much deeper problem: a growing water crisis. With groundwater levels plummeting, urban areas growing drier, and surface water becoming more scarce, Punjab is grappling with a severe water crisis.  Meanwhile, farmers in Haryana’s districts of Kaithal, Jind, Hisar, Fatehabad, and Sirsa continue to suffer from an acute lack of irrigation.

Both Punjab and Haryana, primarily agrarian economies, were among the biggest beneficiaries of the Green Revolution. Today, however, both states face mounting pressure as their agricultural systems remain heavily dependent on dwindling water resources.

Politically, the matter has exacerbated public emotions and polarized both States. Inadequate collaboration results in wasted monsoon water flowing into Pakistan and excessive groundwater extraction on both sides. The BBMB vacancies and out-of-date tribunal assessments are institutional weaknesses that negatively impact governance and urgently require corrective action.

The Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) Canal should be completed at the earliest. Prioritisation must be given to crop diversification, water conservation, alternate water transport methods, irrigation efficiency improvements, and groundwater monitoring. Even though the water falls under the State List, the Centre must step in as access to water is a humanitarian right and intrinsically linked to the Right to Life under Article 21—especially amid the growing global water crisis.

The Centre needs to support initiatives aimed at fostering confidence and should facilitate continuous interstate dialogue. In place of short-term electoral interests, there should be a long-term political consensus.