The Supreme Court has issued a stern remark to Punjab, stating that it must comply with the court’s orders and clarify its position within two weeks. The next hearing in the case is scheduled for August 12.
Following the Supreme Court’s 2011 decision, Himachal Pradesh began receiving a 7.19 percent share of electricity from BBMB projects, but the dues from the period between 1966 and 2011 have yet to be settled. This outstanding amount is equivalent to approximately 13,066 million units of electricity. The central government has suggested that Punjab and Haryana settle this outstanding amount not in cash but in the form of electricity. Under the proposal, arrangements could be made for Himachal to receive more than 12,000 million units out of the 13,066 million units.
Since the Punjab Reorganization Act of 1966, there has been a dispute among the states regarding the share in BBMB projects. When no resolution was reached, Himachal Pradesh filed a petition in the Supreme Court in 1996. Subsequently, on September 27, 2011, the Supreme Court ruled that Himachal’s share would be set at 7.19 percent. According to the ruling, Punjab’s share is 51.80 percent, Haryana’s is 37.51 percent, Chandigarh’s is 3.50 percent, and Rajasthan’s share remains unchanged.
A significant proposal is that Himachal Pradesh will not have to pay approximately 420 crore rupees to Punjab and Haryana as the capital cost of BBMB projects. This amount will also be adjusted against the electricity dues, potentially providing Himachal with a dual benefit.
Punjab has raised objections regarding the rates. Senior Advocate Nidesh Gupta, representing the Punjab government, stated in court that the proposed rate of 2.50 rupees per unit for calculating the dues is excessively high. If this rate is implemented, Punjab could face an additional loss of around 2,000 crore rupees. For this reason, the state government has filed an objection to the proposal.
During the Supreme Court’s stern remarks, the court noted that Himachal Pradesh does not have the same revenue potential as Punjab and Haryana. Since the rivers and dams are located on Himachal’s land, its rights cannot be overlooked. The court clarified that if a mutual agreement is not reached, it will decide the case based on merits.