AG, Shyam Divan, Ram Jeth face off in in Punjab water dispute

The Supreme Court is seized of another matter involving interesting political consequences. A dispute between Punjab and neighbouring States over construction of canal which has been pending in the Supreme since 2004 led to an very eventful hearing today as senior stalwarts and law officers faced off before a Constitution Bench in court room 2..The matter is being heard by a Bench of Justices Anil R Dave, PC Ghose, Shiva Kirti Singh, AK Goel and Amitava Roy. Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi and Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar appeared for the Central government. Senior Advocate Ram Jethmalani is appearing for Punjab while Senior Advocate Shyam Divan is appearing for Haryana..Background.The case is a special reference to the Supreme Court under Article 143 by the President in 2004. The reference pertains to the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004 passed by Punjab terminating all the water sharing agreements with the neighbouring States..This legislation had jeopardised the construction of Satluj-Yamuna Link canal..Punjab government moots another Bill to return land.Interest in the matter was renewed after the Punjab government introduced another Bill to return the land acquired for the construction of the canal. Haryana took strong objection to this with Cabinet Minister Anil Vij taking to Twitter asking the Centre to intervene and stop Punjab from going ahead with the bill. .Hearing today: Attorney General’s submissions and Shyam Divan’s rebuttal.Anil Vij’s plea, however, seemed to have fallen on deaf ears as the hearing today resulted in great drama. Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar was arguing today when Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi came to court and informed the court that the Bill will be passed today and asked the court to adjourn the case till after the Holi vacation..He said that the new Bill would entail consequences in that the basis for construction of the canal would go..Senior Advocate Shyam Divan objected to the same. He submitted that the legislation by Punjab amounted to denuding the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and is against the federal structure envisaged in the Constitution besides being in violation of Rule of law..“If [the] State is passing legislation which denudes the jurisdiction of this court and defeats the reference, then it should not be allowed. If the decree of this court is ripped apart in this manner, then it completely erodes the status of this court..The lynchpin of federal structure is that there should be an efficacious dispute resolution mechanism to resolve dispute [between States]. If the Supreme Court of India cannot enforce its jurisdiction because of one party legislating successively, then it removes one of the primary limbs of the Constitution.”.The Court turned to Ram Jethmalani, who is representing the State of Punjab. Jethmalani took objection to Divan’s submissions that Punjab is trying to denude the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Jethmalani conceded that the issue at hand is not an area of his expertise and he would have to study the issue before making his submissions regarding this..The Court agreed and adjourned the matter for Thursday.