‘Hold your hands till crisis is over’: Punjab and Haryana HC on pleas alleging mismanagement of floods

Chief Justice Sheel Nagu cites the Supreme Court’s cognisance of the floods and asks the Punjab Government to file an affidavit later; petitioners allege mismanagement and poor relief measures.

Written by Manraj Grewal Sharma

Updated: September 8, 2025 06:19 PM IST

4 min read

“The state is thus free to take up the ground as to whether the prayers pending in these petitions can be agitated before the apex court or not,” the bench said in its interim order. (Express Photo)

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Monday declined to issue notices on three Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petitions seeking judicial intervention in the Punjab flood crisis, with Chief Justice Sheel Nagu making “an earnest request” to the petitioners to “hold their hands” till the situation stabilises.

“This court made an earnest request to the petitioners to hold their hands till the crisis on the ground is over,” said the division bench of Chief Justice Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry, recording that “governmental and private bodies are helping the flood victims”.

Despite repeated pleas for an immediate notice, the bench directed the state and its functionaries to file an affidavit, but only after the crisis is over.

Punjab Advocate-General M S Bedi informed the court that the Supreme Court, on September 4, had already taken cognisance of the floods in Anamika Rana vs Union of India and was hearing a petition on similar issues. He added that the prayers before the apex court were “quite comprehensive” and covered “almost all aspects” relating to the causes and consequences of the floods. Anamika Rana’s PIL plea sought a direction to protect the pristine and delicate ecology of the Himalayan states.

“The state is thus free to take up the ground as to whether the prayers pending in these petitions can be agitated before the apex court or not,” the bench said in its interim order.

The petitions, heard together, accused state authorities of failing to prevent the floods and of poor relief measures, which they claimed were “largely driven by civil society”.

Also Read | ‘Taking the court for a ride’: Punjab and Haryana HC raps Nayagaon civic body over open manholes

“We are on the ground, helping the flood-hit people in every village… the administration, and others are only using cameras to capture their so-called relief,” said Gurmohan Preet Singh, a petitioner during the hearing that saw very impassioned exchanges.

‘Overreach’ by Bhakra Beas Management Board

Story continues below this ad

One petitioner, Naveender P K Singh, questioned water resource management, alleging mismanagement and “overreach” by agencies such as the Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB), the Punjab Government, and central authorities. His plea claimed the BBMB allowed Haryana to draw water beyond its quota without Punjab’s consent, violating the Punjab Reorganisation Act 1966. It sought to restrain the BBMB from exceeding its jurisdiction, appoint a neutral chairman, ensure transparent allocation, and direct the Central Water Commission to conduct an independent technical evaluation.

The counsel further alleged Punjab’s dam safety protocols were ignored, leading to “disastrous water discharge” in the last week of August. “They failed to establish any systematic mechanism for inflow and outflow of water,” he argued, blaming this for inundation across nine districts, massive crop loss, and livestock deaths.

As petitioners pressed for the court’s intervention, Chief Justice Nagu remarked, “Please don’t cause any obstruction. The moment we issue notice, their energy, and some people, will be pulled out of that disaster management or relief work, and they’ll have to sit down on a table and prepare a reply for your petition.”

At one point, he asked, “Do you want to interfere in flood relief operations… the Army is out in every district.”

Story continues below this ad

When petitioners insisted on accountability, citing a similar flood in 2023, Chief Justice Nagu responded, “There is a time for that. You can seek all these explanations when the crisis is over.”

The petitioners also called for setting up a body or mechanism to ensure that Punjab is not flooded again. “Surely there is a way to ensure that. We can seek the help of experts from around the world,” said a petitioner.

Advocate Angrej Singh, on behalf of petitioner Shubham sought sought withdrawal of his plea just as the bench began dictating the order; the court dismissed it as withdrawn.

Advocate Kanwar Pahul Singh was allowed time to file better particulars on alleged instances of human trafficking, which he claimed were related to the floods.

From the homepage