Chandigarh, June 8 -- The Punjab and Haryana high court has dismissed a petition from the Punjab government seeking modification of the May 6 order that allowed the release of an additional 4,500 cusecs of water to Haryana by Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB). The Punjab government had filed the petition on May 14 arguing that direction was an outcome of concealment of material facts by the BBMB, Haryana and the Centre. "This court disposed of the matter (on May 6) in the backdrop of emergent situation, which had arisen and any delay in resolving the dispute would have caused irreparable damage to millions of residents of different states, including Haryana, Rajasthan and Delhi. With this urgency in mind, this court finally disposed of the matter... (on May 6)," the bench of chief justice Sheel Nagu and justice Sumeet Goel said, dismissing the plea from Punjab. The petition was disposed of on May 26, and the order was released on June 7 evening. The controversy erupted on April 28 when the Haryana government's demand for additional water from the Bhakra Dam was approved by the BBMB despite opposition from Punjab. The Punjab government refused to accept the decision and deployed police at Nangal dam, 13km downstream from Bhakra, to stop the additional water release. The BBMB was established by the Union power ministry in 1966 under Section 79 of the Punjab Reorganisation Act and regulates water distribution from Bhakra, Nangal, Pong, and Ranjit Sagar dams between Punjab, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Delhi and Rajasthan. The Union home ministry stepped in on May 2 and directed that additional water be released to Haryana. However, the BBMB said that the order could not be complied with as Punjab Police prevented board officials from discharging their duties. The BBMB approached the high court on May 5, seeking the court's intervention and demanding that Punjab Police be withdrawn from BBMB. It was during these proceedings, on May 6, the high court ordered that the May 2 decision of the Union home secretary be implemented, whereby Haryana was to get additional water. However, Punjab did not allow implementation of the May 6 order claiming that 'not a drop could be spared'. HC reiterated its order on May 9 and also sought names of Punjab officials who did not allow the implementation of the HC order. However, it was also not implemented. Finally, on May 14, Punjab filed a plea seeking recall of the May 6 order, which has been dismissed by the HC now.Lawyers said, practically, this decision has "no impact on the ground" as a new water-sharing cycle has started from May 21. The high court said that on April 29, Haryana wrote a letter to the Centre seeking its intervention in the backdrop of Punjab's opposition. But the letter merely seeks implementation of the April 28 resolution of BBMB allowing more water to Haryana. The court said that this letter can't be treated as a reference, which, as per rule 7 of the BBMB Act, a dissenting state can raise in the event of a dispute. "This letter does not fall within the realm of 'material fact' (which Punjab was claiming) non-disclosure of which is inconsequential," the court said. The court also said that Punjab has argued that since the April 29 'reference' was pending with the Centre, BBMB was not competent to decide the issue of water sharing. However, this issue does not arise as the April 29 letter or "reference" of the Haryana government to the Centre was not made under Rule 7 of the BBMB Act. "More so, Punjab is not left remediless, since it can always make a reference to Central government in terms of Rule 7," the court said adding that Punjab was given liberty to approach Centre as per rules. But has not been availed by the state. It further added that with regard to Punjab's argument that the Union home secretary was not competent to take the May 2 decision on the issue and since Haryana's request of April 29 has been held to be "not in terms of Rule 7,' the very foundation of raising the said ground does not exist," it added....