Haryana’s recurrent flooding is less a natural inevitability than the cumulative outcome of disrupted river and drainage systems. The state lies across two basins: the Yamuna in the Ganga basin and the Ghaggar with its tributaries Markanda and Tangri in the Indus basin, alongside ephemeral Aravalli streams such as the Sahibi (Najafgarh system), Krishnawati, and Dohan that historically carried monsoon flows southwest into desert tracts (Singh 2020; CGWB 2019). Over decades, wetlands, floodplains, and natural drainage channels that buffered these flows have been filled, farmed, or built upon, notably the deliberate drainage of Najafgarh Jheel from the mid-19th century (Delhi Gazetteer 1883; Jain & Singh 2021). Unplanned roads and highways with undersized culverts, cultivation in riverbeds, plantation in seasonal channels, and rampant sand mining in the Yamuna and Markanda have further obstructed watercourses (NGT 2013; NGT 2025). Urban centers such as Gurugram and Ambala illustrate the compounded effects of rapid “concretization,” poor drainage maintenance, and encroachment (TERI 2021; Hindustan Times 2024).
Historical evidence shows that linear infrastructure without hydrological study—evident during the 1995 Haryana floods—creates “bowls” of stagnation across central districts like Rohtak, Jhajjar, Jind, and Bhiwani (Bhalla 1996). Despite recent state efforts, including 604 flood-control schemes (₹1,205 crore, 2023) and a drainage master plan (2025), durable solutions require a science-led approach: legal notification of floodplains and wetlands, hydrology-based cross-drainage design under infrastructure, strict enforcement against in-channel mining, and integration of blue–green corridors into urban plans (CWC 2023; Haryana TCP 2024). Unless Haryana re-aligns with its natural water paths, floods will remain engineered disasters rather than natural hazards.
The natural system (before we paved over it)
Haryana straddles two basins. To the east, the Yamuna forms the state’s boundary and joins the Ganga system; to the west, the largely seasonal Ghaggar and its tributaries (notably Markanda and Tangri) flow out of the Shivaliks and spread across northern/central districts before dissipating toward Punjab/Rajasthan—the Indus side of the divide. South-west Haryana is threaded by ephemeral Aravalli streams—Sahibi and its former tributaries Krishnawati, Dohan, Sota—that historically ran SW across Rewari–Mahendragarh and into desert tracts or, for Sahibi, onward to the Yamuna via the Najafgarh system. In short: North and northeast receive water that naturally wants to move southwest or east; wide floodplains, wetlands and shallow depressions once buffered that flow.
A historical turn: from jheels and choes to “drains”
Colonial and post-colonial interventions systematically straightened, embanked and drained wetlands to “reclaim” land. The best documented case is Najafgarh Jheel—about 220 km² in the 19th-century Delhi Gazetteer—deliberately drained from 1865 by cutting the Sahibi outlet to the Yamuna. Much of the bed became farmland and urban colonies, shrinking flood storage and increasing downstream risk.
Similar stories repeat along the Badshahpur–Najafgarh corridor in Gurugram: rapid urbanization severed or constricted natural channels, while paved surfaces surged. TERI’s city-scale assessment maps built-up sprawl over old drainage and warns that relic wetlands converted to farms/colonies now overflow when monsoon peaks.
What’s gone wrong (and where)
1) Loss of floodplains, waterbodies, and natural drains.
Urban expansion has filled/encroached low-lying catchments (jheels, ponds, choes), narrowing conveyance and erasing storage. Gurugram’s Najafgarh catchment is a textbook example, with TERI documenting the conversion of wetland to agriculture and housing and the consequent surge in flood exposure.
2) Building in the path of water.
From Ambala to Kalka–Panchkula, construction in riverbeds and across choes has translated heavy rain into urban disaster. This monsoon alone, authorities flagged houses built within the Tangri’s bed and repeatedly closed bridges as Sukhna Choe overtopped; floodgates at Sukhna Lake were opened multiple times to protect the city. These are modern reminders that structures placed where water must pass will be sacrificed first.
3) Roads and rails that cross-cut catchments with undersized vents.
Where highways/corridors intersect natural drainage, culverts and cross-drainage works often don’t match the width, slope, or hydrograph of the original channels. The result is a dam-like backwater in intense rain and rapid outflanking/erosion when embankments fail. This pattern is repeatedly seen along Badshahpur–Najafgarh and in the tricity’s causeways during peak flows. (Indian Roads Congress manuals long require hydrological sizing and alignment to natural drainage; failures are implementation—not knowledge—gaps.)
4) Concretization that kills recharge and pushes peaks.
Large swathes of Gurugram/Faridabad have become impervious. With infiltration throttled, runoff peaks are higher and earlier, overwhelming already-compromised drains and ponding in the “bowl” districts—Jind, Rohtak, Jhajjar, parts of Hisar/Bhiwani—where north-to-SW natural through-flow is now choked by linear infrastructure and encroachments. TERI’s spatial evidence for Gurugram underlines the mechanism.
5) Agriculture and plantations on active floodplains.
Where floodplains and seasonal channels were converted to farmland and orchards, the roughness, bunds and ad-hoc embankments deflect and slow flood waves, raising water levels upstream and shifting risk sideways. The Najafgarh case documents farmland take-over of wetland beds; officials in Ambala this year again warned about structures in riverbeds suffering avoidable damage.
6) Unregulated mining that literally moves rivers.
Multiple recent proceedings show illegal sand mining in the Yamuna and Markanda within Haryana, including a 2025 field inspection in Sonipat that found the Yamuna’s natural course altered—an egregious way to amplify flood hazards and bank erosion. NGT has ordered probes and wider policy on mining-related river crossings, underscoring systemic risk.
7)Ownership of rivers: The rivers have been robed of ownership on the land through which they flow. Whether it is Yamuna that cross the eastern side with Uttar Pradesh, land records exhibit that Yamuna flows on the land of private owners; in the absence or not enforced laws for rivers, the practice of agriculture is rampant, decades ago only summer cucumbers were allowed to grow without any tillage has thrown away and, now crops like rice, wheat are grown in the river tract. Even plantation of sugarcane and perennial fruit trees are grown in the riverbeds of seasonal rivers.
River-by-river snapshot (orientation & issues)
Yamuna (Ganga basin): forms Haryana’s eastern edge; its Najafgarh (Sahibi) inflow carries heavy stormwater and pollution loads; encroachment/mining episodes have changed channel behavior in reaches like Sonipat.
Ghaggar (Indus side): monsoon-fed from the Shivaliks; swells across Ambala–Panchkula–Sirsa; capacity/extraction issues recur each monsoon, with coordinated gate operations (e.g., Sukhna) now routine.
Markanda & Tangri: flashy Shivalik tributaries; encroachment and in-channel mining have heightened risk; Ambala repeatedly hits danger marks, flooding adjacent colonies.
Sahibi/Najafgarh system: rises in the Aravallis, traverses south Haryana, historically pooled in Najafgarh Jheel before draining to the Yamuna; today, the “drain” stands in for a buried river. Krishnawati and Dohan are ephemeral tributaries that often disappear into sands in Mahendragarh/Bhiwani.
Governance signals
Haryana has approved large flood-control and drain-management packages and convened state boards on drought/flood control; Delhi-region agencies increasingly coordinate Sukhna/Ghaggar gate operations. Yet, without land-use enforcement on floodplains, hydrology-led transport design, and mining control, budgets will chase symptoms more than causes.
What a science-based fix looks like (actionable)
1. Map and legally notify all natural drains, floodplains, wetlands and paleo-channels (district-wise), and integrate them as no-build blue-green corridors in master plans; TERI’s Gurugram atlas is a ready template.
2. Re-open choked cross-drainage under highways/railways: re-size culverts to design floods based on observed hydrographs, align with channel thalwegs, and add overflow relief cuts where bowls form. (This is standard practice in IRC guidance; the gap is compliance.)
3. Wetland/floodplain restoration: prioritize Najafgarh Jheel remnant cells, village ponds, and Markanda–Tangri flood meadows as monsoon storage; buy-back or compensate for high-risk parcels instead of endlessly embanking.
4. Zero-tolerance on in-channel mining and temporary “mining bridges” that throttle flow; use remote sensing + AIS/GPS on tippers; align with NGT’s call for national norms on river crossings.
5. Farm practice reforms on floodplains: shift to seasonal fodder/low-structure crops, remove bunds pre-monsoon, and ban woody plantations within active channels. Najafgarh’s history shows the cost of treating a flood store like arable land.
6. Urban retrofits: citywide permeability mandates, detention tanks and recharge trenches; restore the Badshahpur–Najafgarh chain with continuous right-of-way and silt traps.
Bottom line
Haryana’s floods are not “natural disasters” so much as hydrological consequences of land-use and linear infrastructure decisions. The science and the history both say the same thing: let water go where it wants—over space and time—or it will go there all at once. The fixes are known; what’s needed now is to build and enforce them on the map, on the ground, and under every road.
References
1. TERI (2021). Water Sustainability Assessment of Gurugram.
2. National Green Tribunal (2013, 2025 orders on Yamuna, Ghaggar mining and floodplain encroachment).
3. Central Water Commission (2023). Integrated Management of Yamuna Barrages.
4. Haryana Town & Country Planning Dept. (2024). Order on Natural Drainage in Urban Planning.
5. CGWB (2019). Ground Water Year Book, Haryana.
6. Delhi Gazetteer (1883). Najafgarh Jheel Drainage Records.
7. Hindustan Times (2024). Reports on Ambala/Tangri flooding.
8. Jain, M. & Singh, R. (2021). “Hydrological transformations of Najafgarh Basin,” Indian Journal of Geography.
9. Bhalla, S. (1996). Report on 1995 Haryana Floods.
·
No comments:
Post a Comment