(a) whether the Central Electricity Authority or Central Water Commission has prepared any
background note regarding the claim of Rajasthan`s share from the hydro power projects of Punjab;
(b) if so, the details thereof; and
(c) if not, the reasons therefor?
MINISTER OF THE STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF POWER (SHRI BHARATSINH SOLANKI)
(a): A background paper on sharing of power by Rajasthan, Haryana and Himachal Pradesh from some of the
Hydroelectric projects in Punjab was prepared by a Committee constituted in Central Electricity Authority
in July, 1999.
(b) & (c): The findings of the said Committee are summarized below:
`After analyzing various points raised by the States of Rajasthan, Haryana and Himachal Pradesh in support
of their claim in the share of power generated from Anadpur Sahib, Mukerian, Thein Dam, UBDC Stage-II and
in the absence of observations of Government of Punjab, the Committee feels that it will be in the best
interest of all the concerned states that agreement reached on 10.05.1984 between the Chief Ministers
of Rajasthan and Haryana and the Governor of Punjab and Government of India regarding supply of cooling
water for Roper Thermal Power Station and commissioning of the Anandpur Sahib Hydel Project be followed.`
It may be mentioned that an agreement was reached between the States of Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan and
Government of India on 10.05.1984 wherein it was agreed that in view of the claims raised by Haryana and
Rajasthan for sharing of power in Anandpur Sahib Hydel Project, Mukerian Hydel Project, Thein Dam project,
UBDC Stage-II and Shahpur Kandi Hydel Scheme, the Government of India shall refer the matter to the Supreme
Court for its opinion. The opinion of the Supreme Court was to be sought on whether the States of Rajasthan
and Haryana are entitled to a share in the power generated from these hydel schemes and in case they are,
what would be the share of each State.
However, subsequently in the discussions held between the Chief Ministers of Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan
on 29-30 July, 1992 and 6th August, 1992, a consensus was reached not to refer the matter to the Supreme
Court. It was also decided that the States would come to a reasonable agreement through mutual consultations.
In order to resolve the issue amicably, a number of formal and informal discussions have taken place. However,
no consensus has emerged so far due to the divergent views of the stakeholder States.