Rajasthan-Haryana MoU on Yamuna water sharing sparks controversy

Rajasthan’s Chief Minister Bhajan Lal Sharma recently returned from Delhi after signing a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Haryana on sharing of Yamuna River water, a development hailed by some as a significant step toward resolving decades-old water disputes between the two states.

The agreement, signed in the presence of Union Home Minister Amit Shah and Union Jal Shakti Minister C.R. Patil, aims to operationalise water sharing under the Upper Yamuna River Board agreement, with Haryana agreeing to supply 580 million cubic meters (MCM) of water annually from July to October through three underground pipelines stretching approximately 300 kilometre from Hathinikund to Rajasthan.

While the MoU marks progress in cooperation, it has reignited political and environmental debates. Opposition parties in Rajasthan, led by Congress leaders including former chief minister Ashok Gehlot and Rajasthan Pradesh Congress Committee (RPCC) president Govind Singh Dotasra, have sharply criticised the agreement, demanding full disclosure of its terms.

They argue that the BJP-led Rajasthan government capitulated under pressure from the Union government, resulting in a deal that delivers only a fraction of the water and for a limited time—four monsoon months instead of a 12-month continuous supply promised under the earlier 1994 agreement.

The 1994 interstate water sharing pact allocated Yamuna waters as follows: Haryana 40.6 per cent, Uttar Pradesh 35.1 per cent, Rajasthan 10.4 per cent, Delhi 6.3 per cent, and Himachal Pradesh 1.7 per cent.

However, due to political disagreements and changing governments, the agreement remained largely unimplemented for more than three decades. Congress leaders say Rajasthan’s rightful share was effectively denied, exacerbating the region’s water scarcity.

Gehlot and opposition leader Dotasra emphasise that Churu, Sikar and Jhunjhunu—which would receive water from the pipeline—have waited for decades for their share of Yamuna waters. They also recall Rajasthan's historic water woes, highlighting the undelivered 0.8-million-acre feet (MAF) of water from Punjab under the 1995 Rajiv Gandhi-Longowal accord, whose non-implementation has severely impacted irrigation in northern Rajasthan districts like Sri Ganganagar and Bikaner.

According to these leaders, the Union government’s failure to enforce such accords has compounded Rajasthan’s water crisis.

Congress leaders allege that despite the massive Rs 37,000 crore estimated cost of pipeline construction, Rajasthan may still not receive sufficient water to meet its needs. The water supplied is contingent on the monsoon surplus, and in years of poor rainfall, deliveries could be severely curtailed. This uncertainty fuels the opposition’s skepticism about the agreement’s long-term benefits.

Tika Ram Jully, leader of the opposition in Rajasthan, echoed these concerns, accusing the BJP government of using the agreement as a political stunt focused more on the optics of laying pipelines than securing a reliable water share. He pointed out that the previous Congress government had prepared a Rs 31,000 crore Detailed Project Report (DPR) for Yamuna water projects which the Narendra Modi government allegedly did not approve, leaving past initiatives incomplete.

Jully said, “Yamuna water is Rajasthan’s right, not charity,” highlighting the demand for rightful and timely water delivery.

On the Haryana side, chief minister Nayab Singh Saini defended the agreement as a “dispute-free” framework jointly prepared by Haryana, Rajasthan, and the Central Water Commission (CWC). He expressed confidence that it would secure stable water sharing for decades.

However, irrigation experts and retired officials caution that diverting surplus Yamuna water to Rajasthan could reduce groundwater recharge across six Haryana districts—Yamunanagar, Karnal, Panipat, Sonipat, Faridabad and Palwal. These areas rely on monsoon river flows for groundwater replenishment, and diverting water may worsen water scarcity in the state.

Environmentalists and opposition leaders from Haryana also argue that the state should first claim its full entitled water share from Punjab, including through the long-pending Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) canal project, before transferring water to Rajasthan.

The Indian National Lok Dal (INLD), which vehemently opposed the 1994 reduction of Haryana’s water allocation from nearly 67 per cent to 46 per cent, has pledged to continue its democratic struggle to protect Haryana’s water rights.

The politics surrounding this water agreement reflect the larger complexity of inter-state river water sharing in India, where hydrological realities intersect with historical grievances and political pressures. While the Union government’s involvement has facilitated cooperation, opposition leaders accuse the centre of exerting undue influence on Rajasthan’s negotiating position, resulting in a deal perceived by some as inequitable.

Transparency in the agreement’s technical and financial terms has become a central demand from opposition parties and water campaigners. Without full public disclosure, skepticism is likely to persist, potentially undermining public trust and cooperation between the states.

Rajasthan’s opposition warns that excessive celebration of this MoU risks overshadowing the urgent need for actual water deliveries that meet the region’s long-standing agricultural and drinking water needs.

Though the Rajasthan-Haryana Yamuna water sharing agreement is a significant step toward addressing water scarcity and interstate disputes, it is far from a final solution. The success of this pact will depend not only on pipeline construction but also on equitable water allocation, environmental sustainability, clear regulatory frameworks and political goodwill.

It remains to be seen whether both states can transcend political differences and fully realise the benefits of this agreement for millions of farmers and residents dependent on Yamuna waters.