Punjab's Flood Fury: High Court Demands Answers on Decades of River Neglect

The legal storm brewing in the Punjab and Haryana High Court is as turbulent as the floodwaters that ravaged Punjab in 2023, with judges now demanding an unequivocal explanation for the state’s apparent negligence. At the heart of this intense judicial scrutiny lies a single, damning question: why have Punjab's rivers not been desilted for over two decades, despite clear warnings and devastating consequences?

During a recent, heated hearing, the state’s Advocate General (AG) presented a formidable defense, describing river desilting as a "mammoth task." He argued that addressing the accumulated silt and debris requires not just colossal funds but also an army of dedicated personnel and sophisticated machinery.

Further complicating matters, he pointed a finger at rampant illegal sand mining, asserting that such illicit activities exacerbate the flood situation, undermining any official efforts to maintain riverbeds. The AG appealed for patience, requesting a minimum of six months to craft a comprehensive, actionable plan – a timeline that did little to appease the court’s growing impatience.

However, the state's narrative was immediately challenged by Senior Advocate P.S.

Bajwa, representing the petitioners, who delivered a scathing indictment of government inaction. Bajwa highlighted a critical, overlooked fact: the last recorded desilting effort in Punjab’s rivers dates back to a staggering 1999. This alarming lapse, he argued, directly contributed to the catastrophic floods of 2023.

He didn't stop there. Bajwa pointed to a crucial 2018 study that explicitly recommended widespread desilting as a vital preventative measure against future floods – advice that, tragically, appears to have been left to gather dust.

Bajwa’s powerful submission painted a picture of a state utterly unprepared for a crisis that expert analysis had long predicted.

He contended that the state’s failure to act decisively, its prolonged neglect of essential river maintenance, transformed what might have been manageable rainfall into a widespread disaster, causing immense damage to life, property, and livelihoods across Punjab. The court, clearly swayed by the gravity of these revelations, pushed back hard against the state’s request for additional time, emphasizing the urgency of the situation.

The judges are seeking not just explanations but concrete, immediate steps to mitigate future risks.

As the legal proceedings continue, with the next hearing slated for August 19, the spotlight remains firmly on Punjab’s commitment to its environmental responsibilities and the safety of its citizens.

This is more than just a court case; it is a critical examination of governance, accountability, and the potentially devastating cost of bureaucratic inertia. The verdict, in the court of public opinion and in the High Court, will hinge on whether Punjab can finally rise to the "mammoth task" of protecting its lifelines.