In the simmering political and environmental dispute over river water sharing between the northern Indian states of Punjab and Haryana, a bureaucratic reshuffle has further complicated an already volatile situation. Just a day after the Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB) ordered the release of 8,500 cusecs of water from the Bhakra dam to Haryana — despite Punjab’s stern objections — the officer overseeing water regulation in the region was abruptly transferred.
Akashdeep Singh, a Punjab cadre officer and Director of Water Regulation at Nangal, had resisted implementing the BBMB’s decision, insisting that water could only be released upon receipt of an official indent (a formal requisition) from Punjab, in accordance with the Regulation Manual that governs the release of river waters across state lines. His principled stand — arguably an effort to protect Punjab’s share of the water — has now cost him his position. Replacing him is Sanjeev Kumar, a Haryana cadre officer with limited experience in water regulation but deemed more aligned with the current administrative objectives.
The transfer, officially described as a “mutual request,” has drawn swift denial from Akashdeep Singh himself, who wrote to the BBMB denying he ever sought the move. Meanwhile, Punjab’s top engineers and legal teams have mobilised, challenging not just the water release order but also the method by which it is being enforced — through what they allege is political coercion disguised as administrative protocol.
To observers of Indian federal politics and environmental governance, this is no mere bureaucratic skirmish. It is emblematic of the larger tensions that define river water disputes in the subcontinent, where competing state interests, agrarian pressure, and climate vulnerability intersect. At the heart of the dispute is the management of the waters from the Bhakra and Beas rivers, critical lifelines for both Punjab and Haryana. Historically, allocations from these rivers have been contentious since Haryana’s creation in 1966, when it was carved out of Punjab. While Punjab claims historical usage and riparian rights, Haryana demands its constitutionally mandated share, citing increasing needs for agriculture and drinking water.
But this latest episode suggests that decisions over water are no longer merely hydrological or technical — they are deeply political. The BBMB, which functions under the purview of the Union Ministry of Power, is being accused by Punjab leaders of tilting in favor of Haryana under central government pressure. The timing of Akashdeep Singh’s transfer, just after he attempted to enforce the manual’s guidelines, has fueled these allegations. The Punjab government’s resistance, led by the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), has escalated into a full-fledged protest movement, with demonstrations erupting across the state.
Further fanning the flames, the BBMB has also transferred its Secretary, Surinder Singh Mittal, a Haryana native, who Punjab officials claim was instrumental in pushing the decision to allocate extra water to Haryana. In his place, Balbir Singh, an engineer from Rajasthan, has been given additional charge — a move aimed at neutralizing accusations of regional bias but which may not quell the political temperature.
The Punjab government has formally requested that Sanjeev Kumar’s appointment be revoked, citing his lack of technical experience in water regulation. Engineers argue that such critical decisions should not be made under political duress or by those unfamiliar with the sensitive hydrological balance in the region, especially when dam reservoirs are already strained under the weight of both agriculture and climate unpredictability.
For Punjab, which is preparing for the upcoming sowing season, the diversion of water could have severe implications. The state’s cotton belt, reliant on early irrigation, is already grappling with water shortages, and any further depletion from Bhakra could disrupt crop cycles. Meanwhile, Haryana continues to press its case on humanitarian grounds, arguing that the water is urgently needed for drinking purposes in parched southern districts.
Yet, according to data presented by Punjab officials, Haryana has already received more than its allocated share — over 104% of its annual entitlement — raising questions about whether the latest release is about need or political accommodation.
As India hurtles toward a hotter, drier future, conflicts over shared water resources are expected to intensify. Climate change, combined with population pressure and inefficient water use, has turned rivers into fault lines. What’s unfolding between Punjab and Haryana is a stark preview of the kinds of inter-state conflicts that may become the norm in the years ahead, not just in India, but across the global South.
Beyond the political theatrics, what’s at stake is the credibility of institutions like the BBMB to operate impartially and uphold scientific principles in resource allocation. When decisions are driven by bureaucratic maneuvering instead of transparent governance, it risks undermining public trust — and that, perhaps more than the water itself, is what’s truly in short supply.
This we generated article and is based on publicly available reports and official communications for informative and editorial purposes.
#WaterConflict #PunjabHaryanaDispute #IndiaClimateCrisis #BhakraDam #RiverPolitics