1. KISHENGANGA H.E.PROJECT This is a 330 MW H.E. Project on river Kishenganga, a Tributary of river Jhelum. After power generation, the waters are proposed to be delivered into Bonar- Madhmati Nallah, another Tributary of Jhelum. Under the provisions of the Treaty, is required to protect the then existing hydro-electric and agricultural uses by on river Kishenganga (called Neelum in Pakistan).

Pakistan raised two objections. Its first objection was to the inter-tributary diversion of water on the grounds of adverse impact on its Neelum Jhelum HEP claimed as under construction since 1988, irrigation uses claimed as 1,33,209 hectare and environment downstream of Kishenganga HEP. However, “the then existing uses” which were claimed remained unsubstantiated despite India repeatedly seeking details of these uses. There is no explicit provision in the Treaty relating to adverse effects on ecology and environment.

Pakistan’s second objection was to the permissibility of drawdown flushing of reservoirs by India for sediment control.

The issues were discussed in various meetings of the Permanent Indus Commission. However in a communication dated 17.05.2010 Government of Pakistan initiated Court of Arbitration under the treaty. A seven member court of Arbitration was set up. On an application by Pakistan for interim measures, the Court gave an interim order in September 2011 under which India could carry out all the works on the KHEP except permanent works on the river bed at the dam site.

After the Parties furnished written instruments, the hearing on merit was held in August 2012. The Court of Arbitration gave a Partial Award on 18 February 2013. In regard to first dispute, it allowed inter-tributary transfer of water subject to a “minimum flow” to be released from KHEP in river Kishenganga which will be quantified by the final award of the Court. In this regard, India and Pakistan have submitted the information and comments sought by the Court.

Regarding second dispute, the Partial Award ruled that the accumulation of sediment in the reservoir is not an unforeseen emergency and accordingly disallowed lowering of water below DSL for drawdown flushing of sediment in KHEP and future projects on Western Rivers. India filed a request dated 18.05.13, seeking the Court to clarify that its decision is subject to evaluation and availability of alternate techniques of sediment management. The parties filed further submission in the matter as directed by the Court.

The court gave the final award on 20th December, 2013 and upheld India’s right to direct the water of Kishenganga for power generation subject to maintaining minimum flow of 9 cumec below dam of Kishenganga. The Court has also clarified that except in the case of an unforeseen emergency, the Treaty does not permit reduction below Dead storage level of water level in the reservoirs of Run-of-River (RoR) plants on the Western Rivers. However, this restriction is not applicable to HEPs already under operation.

2. TULBUL NAVIGATION PROJECT TulbuI Navigation Project is located on the river Jhelum just below the exit of Wular Lake The project envisages regulated depletion of the natural storage accruing in the Wular Lake during monsoon months to provide the requisite draft for navigation in the following winter months. Pakistan is contesting it as a Storage Project. The project is beneficial to Pakistan also, in terms of firming up power generation at Mangla Dam and other hydel projects en-route. After discussions at Commissioners level could not resolve the issue, the Government of India took up the matter for bilateral settlement. Pakistan placed a precondition for Government Level talks that the works on this project be suspended. Accordingly, since 2nd October 1987, the works on this project remain suspended. Subsequent to this, eight rounds of Secretariat level talks were held. A stage of a draft agreement between the parties had been reached during the 6th & 7th rounds of Secretary level talks.

However, Pakistan in one of their Non-papers, denied that legal and technical aspects of the issue had been resolved and stated that the issue needed to be discussed comprehensively in accordance with the . Thereafter, six meetings between Secretary (Water Resources), Govt, of India and Secretary (Water & Power), Government of Pakistan under composite dialogue have so far been held in Nov, 1998, 29-30 July 2004, 28-29 June 2005, 22-23 June 2006 , 30-31 August 2007, 11-14 May 2011 and 27-28 March 2012. Indian side agreed to provide additional technical data to Pakistan. The Pakistan shall examine all the data and furnish its view before the next round of the talks. Both sides further agreed that, if required, they will explore the way forward for resolving the issue under the provisions of the Treaty.

Accordingly, India has submitted available additional information in a January 2013. Pakistan has raised certain observation on the information and has been responded. The dates for the next talks have not been finalized so far.

3. CONSTRUCTION OF BML-HANSI BRANCH BUTANA BRANCH MULTIPURPOSE CHANNEL BY

Haryana took up the construction of the project “Bhakra Main Line-Hansi Branch- Butana Branch Multipurpose Link Channel” for equitable distribution of Ravi-Beas waters presently drawn by the State from the Bhakra Main Line. The scheme involves opening a new off-take point on the Bhakra Main Line to draw the Ravi Beas waters partly through existing off-take point and partly through the proposed channel for equitable distribution in the State. On grounds of inter-state ramifications, the State of has objected to the scheme in Original Suit 1/2007 & IA 1/2007 and has also objected in Original Suit 3/2007.

Haryana’s proposal was discussed in the 192nd Meeting of the Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB) held on 11.07.2006. The Board decided that Haryana should request CWC for a technical study on the feasibility of maintaining water supplies to all the Member-States as per their allocated share. CWC completed appraisal of DPR and also these studies. CWC requested Haryana to obtain permission from BBMB for puncturing BML and certificate of water availability at the off-take location.

In the hearing held on 05.10.07 in OS 1/2007 and 3/2007, the Hon’ble Supreme Court directed the States to submit their documents to CWC and CWC to give its reasoned opinion after giving hearing to the States. CWC gave its reasoned opinion on 11.03.2008 and the matter is presently before the Hon’ble Supreme Court for decision.

. 4. SETTLEMENT OF OUSTEES DUE TO CONSTRUCTION OF PONG DAM, IN THE CANAL COMMAND AREAS OF RAJASTHAN

Oustees of Pong Dam are being settled in the Command area of Rajasthan, which is the major beneficiary from the dam. Rajasthan made allotments under the colonization rules enacted in 1972 for the purpose. However, in 1992, it unilaterally amended them and cancelled allotments of land made to certain oustees. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in a judgement dated 26.07.1996 quashed the notification of the amendments and directed that Special District Judges will look into the validity of the cancellations made under the quashed rules and a Committee under the Chairmanship of Secretary (Water Resources) will settle the eligible oustees.

Eighteen meetings of the committee have been held so far, the last being on 30.4.2015 at New . In these meetings, the Committee has sorted out the discrepancies between the two states in the various numbers involved in the settlement process. The Committee has also been reviewing various other issues from time to time.

Rajasthan has restored possession of land to the oustees whose cases were decided favourably by the Special Distt. Judges as per the Supreme Court Order. The lands allotted to oustees whose cases are decided unfavourably by the Special District Judges will revert to Rajasthan and will be utilized for allotment to oustees not yet settled. The Order also provides that in the case of supervening reasons, the eligible oustee yet to be settled may be allotted alternative land. Rajasthan’s plea is that local Rajasthanis are settled in the lands reverting to Rajasthan in Stage I of the Indira Gandhi Nahar command in which suitable clusters of land for allotment to oustees are no longer available. However, the oustees yet to be settled, have been demanding allotment in Stage I, and not Stage II where Rajasthan is offering the allotments. There are also issues over delay in issue of Eligibility Certificates by Himachal Pradesh, delay in oustees applying for the allotment of land, non- appearance of oustees for allotment of land despite repeated notices etc.

A number of aggrieved oustees have been independently filing Civil Writ Petitions before the Hon’ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla. High Court of Himachal Pradesh gave verdict in 39 cases on 6.11.2013. It has directed that the representations of oustees in these cases and other similar cases will be considered by High Level Committee and speaking orders to be issued by them within six months of the receipt of such representations. In the 17th meeting of the committee, it was decided that the representations so received shall be examined by Government of H.P within one month and eligibility would be conveyed to Government of Rajasthan. Government of Rajasthan, within a period of two months from the date of such reference from Government of H.P, shall examine the matter and dispose of the same by a speaking order. Further Hon’ble high Court of Himachal Pradesh, while disposing another 49 petitions vide order dated 23.08.2014, directed that these representations may be considered by the Committee as above. Accordingly, the Governments of Himachal Pradesh and Rajasthan have been requested to take necessary action on such representations also as per the decision taken in the 17th Meeting of the high Level Committee.

Further, the progress in the matter was reviewed in the 18th Meeting of the High Powered Committee held on 30.4.2015. In the meeting it was decided that a committee comprising of Commissioner, Colonisation, , Rajasthan and Dy. Commissioner (R&R), Himachal Pradesh will meet once in every three months for reconciliation of the data and exchange of progress made in respect of every category. The Committee would expedite the allotment of land in all the balance cases. Further, Secretary (Revenue & Colonisation), Rajasthan and Additional Chief Secretary, Himachal Pradesh will meet once in every six months to review the progress in the matter and give direction to expedite the cases wherever necessary.

5. - LINK CANAL

Sutlej Yamuna Link (SYL) Canal running about 121 km in Punjab and 90 km in Haryana envisages conveying 3.45 MAF out of 3.5 MAF of Haryana’s average annual share of surplus Ravi-Beas waters ( as per 1981 agreement). It will irrigate an area of 4.46 lakh ha. in Haryana and also benefit Punjab in terms of irrigation to an area of 1.28 lakh ha. and in terms of power, a total of 50 MW of power generation at two power houses. Haryana portion of the canal is complete. Punjab portion of the canal was targeted for completion by March 1991. By July, 1990 when a major portion of the works had been completed, the works came to a standstill following the killing of the Chief Engineer and a Superintending Engineer of the project on 23.7.1990. As the works were not resumed, filed a Suit in 1996 in the with a prayer for immediately restarting the work and completing the SYL Canal. Supreme Court delivered its judgement on 15.1.02 directing the State of Punjab to complete the canal within one year failing which, the Government of India to complete the canal as expeditiously as possible through its own agencies.

Govt. of Punjab filed an Original Suit No.1/2003 in the Supreme Court on 13.01.03 citing certain changed circumstances and praying for dissolution/discharge of the obligation to construct the canal.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in its judgement dated 4.6.2004, dismissed the suit filed by Punjab and directed the UoI to carry out its action plan for completion of the SYL canal within the specified time frame. In compliance, UoI nominated CPWD as the construction agency and also set up an empowered committee within the time frame specified. Govt. of Punjab was also requested to get in touch with CPWD to finalise the details of handing over/taking over of the canal works. After some initial response, the State of Punjab on 12.7.2004 enacted the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004 terminating the Agreement dated 31.12.1981 and all other agreements related to Ravi Beas waters and protecting all existing and actual utilization through the existing systems. Govt. of Punjab on 13.07.04 also informed Ministry of Water Resources that any step taken in furtherance of the 31.12.1981 agreement would be against the legislative mandate of the Act. Central Govt. on 15.7.2004 filed an application before the Hon’ble Supreme Court for taking on record the developments subsequent to 4.6.2004 and seeking such other and further orders as deemed fit in the interest of justice. A Presidential Reference in the matter of the Act was also filed on 22.7.2004, which is before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.