85% of Sutlej-Yamuna Canal has been constructed over the last few decades for nearly 700 crores, with Haryana paying for most of it.

Highlights Punjab, Haryana face-off over sharing water from the River Sutlej

Haryana threatens to cut off water supply to Delhi

Haryana accuses Delhi CM of 'siding' with Punjab in the water war

For siding with Punjab in a vicious water war, Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal got told off by Haryana today, which warned him to get "your own canal constructed."Recently, Mr Kejriwal, whose Aam Aadmi Party or AAP is coveting big gains in next year's election, said that Punjab does not have enough water to share with Haryana at a time when the neighbouring states are in a Titanic clash over sharing water from the River Sutlej.Reacting to the letter from Haryana, Kapil Mishra, a Delhi minister, said, "Haryana cannot decide whether Delhi gets water. This is decided by Supreme Court judgments."It is a series of historic agreements and treaties that are being brazenly violated by all political parties in Punjab. The opposition Congress and the Akalis, who govern Punjab in a coalition with the BJP, have combined to clear legislation to give back nearly 4,000 acres of land to farmers. The land had been acquired to complete the Sutlej-Yamuna Canal , which has been constructed in fits and starts over the last few decades for nearly 700 crores, with Haryana paying for most of it.Under a decades-old agreement, water would be shared with Haryana via the canal, 85 per cent of which has been built already.The Supreme Court today stopped Punjab from returning the land till the next hearing on March 30. Separately, Punjab Governor Kaptan Singh Solanki has not signed the proposal, but politicians have defied all rules to start filling up the canal with mud to ensure it cannot be used to route water to Haryana. Neither the police nor administration officials have dared to stop them.Many observers predict that if Punjab is allowed to get away with the filling up of canals with mud in order to block the flow of water, it could set a dangerous precedent for other parts of the country and threaten federal unity with inter-state battles for waters that ignore the law.