3 min readChandigarhMar 17, 2026 07:47 PM IST
First published on: Mar 17, 2026 at 07:16 PM IST
“How can you extract more groundwater than what is available?” The Punjab and Haryana high court asked on Tuesday, expressing concern over depleting water levels while hearing a PIL alleging misuse of free electricity for agricultural tubewells.
The division bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry was hearing a petition filed by Balraj Singh Sandhu, a resident of Patti in Tarn Taran district, through advocate Gurnoor Singh Sandhu, challenging the supply of 24-hour free and unmetered electricity to many agricultural consumers in violation of state policy.
The court was told that despite a policy restricting free power supply to about eight hours during the paddy season, around 300 agricultural connections in Patti subdivision alone were allegedly drawing electricity round the clock. The figure emerged from a reply furnished by the Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL) to an RTI application filed by the petitioner.
Appearing in person during the hearing, the petitioner submitted that such unregulated 24-hour supply, without any formal policy backing, was leading to excessive groundwater extraction and undue burden on the power system. He pointed out that PSPCL itself had admitted it was unable to disconnect these connections due to opposition from farmers and consumers.
The petitioner further argued that the issue was not confined to one subdivision but extended across Punjab, where similar connections had been granted to selected consumers. He contended that this selective and unregulated supply was in direct contrast to the state’s notified policy and was accelerating groundwater depletion.
Referring to a report of the Central Groundwater Board, he submitted that Punjab’s groundwater extraction had already reached unsustainable levels, with large parts of the state falling in the “over-exploited” category. In the Patti area itself, groundwater extraction was stated to be as high as 236%, placing it in the most critical zone.
The bench observed that such over-extraction would be “deleterious for the coming generation” and sought to examine whether expert input was required. It directed the Central Groundwater Board, arrayed as a respondent, to file a detailed reply, including any recommendations on curbing excessive groundwater exploitation in the state.
The petitioner also relied on research indicating that continuous free power supply leads to overuse of groundwater, higher borewell intensity and a declining water table, arguing that the policy of unmetered electricity had wider environmental consequences.
During the hearing, it also emerged that while the state had framed its policy in the early 2000s to provide limited-duration free electricity for agriculture, no policy existed for the 24-hour supply being availed by certain consumers.
The bench noted that while the issue before it pertained to a limited geographical area, the larger concern of groundwater depletion and equitable use of natural resources—linked to the right to environment under Article 21—required serious consideration.
It allowed time to the Central Groundwater Board to place its response on record before proceeding further.
The petitioner also relied on research indicating that continuous free power supply leads to overuse of groundwater. (Photo generated using AI) 
Share
