:dateline:In a statement�to the Supreme Court, issued on March 30, the Punjab government�explained�that the Supreme Court doesn�t possess any right to rule on the SYL Canal�issue, or to�abolish the �Punjab Satluj Yamuna Link Canal Land (Transfer of Property Rights)� Bill,�recently�passed by the Punjab assembly. The Punjab government explained that as per section 143 of the Indian Constitution, the full bench of the Supreme Court could only make suggestions to both parties. �
The Satluj-Yamuna Link Canal Land (Transfer of Proprietary Rights) Act 2016 was passed unanimously in the Punjab assembly on March 14. It returned�the land acquired from farmers for the SYL-Canal project back to them free of cost. In response, the Haryana government�sought its cancellation by the Supreme Court.
The Punjab government explained in its statement�that the Supreme Court cannot abolish a bill passed by a state assembly unanimously. So, the restrictions imposed by the Supreme Court bench were not in its jurisdiction. �The government further explained that Haryana and Rajasthan were non-riparian states, �states that naturally did not have�access to any rivers. As per internationally accepted riparian law, these states do not�hold any right to the river waters of the Ravi, Beas and Satluj rivers. Because�cases about water proportions for non-riparian states like Rajasthan and Haryana were still pending, the government argued that the construction of the SYL-Canal could not be justified.
The Punjab government�further added that it was necessary to discuss the�availability of water in these rivers before proceeding.
