Chandigarh, May 8 -- The Punjab and Haryana high court has declined to interfere in a plea by the Punjab government seeking quashing of the Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB) move to allow additional water allocation to Haryana in April-May 2025. The high court bench of chief justice Sheel Nagu and justice Sanjiv Berry advised the state government to approach the central government instead, reminding the state that it had already passed similar directions in the first round of litigation. At the heart of the controversy are the April 23 and April 28 decisions of BBMB in 2025, allowing release of 8,500 cusecs of additional water to Haryana despite opposition from Punjab. The Punjab government refused to accept the decision and deployed police at Nangal dam, 13 km downstream from Bhakra, to stop the additional water release. On May 6, 2025, the high court directed Punjab to release additional water, an order, which was unsuccessfully challenged up to Supreme Court by the state government. However, additional water was not allowed to be released and BBMB officials alleged that they were prevented from execution of orders by police. Now, security of BBMB facilities has been handed over to CISF. The BBMB was established by the Union power ministry in 1966 under Section 79 of the Punjab Reorganisation Act, which regulates water distribution from Bhakra and Nangal dam between Punjab, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Delhi and Rajasthan. After not receiving any relief from the top court, the Punjab government initiated second round of litigation in August 2025, claiming "jurisdictional overreach and arbitrary actions of BBMB". Punjab's main concern was that BBMB's April 2025 decision could be cited as a precedent in future. "The BBMB is only empowered to regulate supply as per existing agreements, not to unilaterally allocate excess water," the government had argued. During the latest hearing on the fresh plea on April 22 this year, the HC observed that the government's argument was not acceptable as in the earlier round of litigation last year, it was already told that the court was not equipped with technical expertise to go into nitty-gritty of the issue of water sharing. Even back then, it had advised that the disenchanted state may approach Centre, the court said in its order, which was released on May 7. "We are unable to subscribe to the argument of learned advocate general of the state of Punjab for the simple reason that since 1974 Rules framed under the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966, statutorily provide that in case any decision of BBMB/chairman of BBMB is disputed by any of the two states, the remedy would lie by making a representation to the central government," the court said....