Bommai sees need for apolitical struggle to get Bedti-Varada river linking project launched
The former Chief Minister was speaking at a preliminary meeting on the river linking project in Haveri. 'I feel there is a surge of public support for the Bedti-Varada river linking project. We should all realise that nothing is greater than people's power. Just as small streams join to form a river, these small rivers of farmers will merge into a great river, as this project requires an apolitical struggle to be fulfilled,' Mr. Bommai said.
Addressing the meeting on the Hukkeri Mutt premises, he said that by managing rivers properly, water can be utilised efficiently. 'Utilising rivers that flow westwards is a big challenge. This raises environmental, forest and biodiversity concerns. If about 100 acres are submerged, opposition arises and cases reach the Supreme Court. Even in the Mahadayi issue, it was not just Goans who opposed it but also environmentalists from Karnataka,' he said.
Mr. Bommai said that the river linking project has been on the agenda for many years. It was the former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee who made river linking a national issue. There are river linking projects elsewhere too. Projects south of the Vindhya mountains face major challenges. River linking helps control floods and makes water available where it is scarce. 'The Varada-Bedti river linking is among the first prospective projects. In 2005, when the former MP Manjunath Konnur and BJP MP Govind Karjol made a move to implement it, there was strong opposition,' he said.
The BJP MP said that when he was Water Resources Minister, he examined the environmental issues and made some changes in 2017. Another modification was made in 2022. There are two proposals — one for Varada-Bedti and the other for Bedti-Dharma-Varada link. The DPR (Detailed Project Report) is not yet ready but a pre-feasibility report exists. The State has approved it. He said he met Union Water Resources Minister C.R. Patil and Minister V. Somanna and held discussions with them. They have assured a positive response within a week, he said.
'Once the DPR is ready, we will know exactly how much water can he used. There are streams like Hirehalla, Bedti and Shalmala. They will know how much water Varada can supply for use in Haveri district. They must also plan where to store this water so that fertile land are not submerged. They need to work with awareness at every stage of this project,' he said.
'We must convince people in Uttara Kannada that the revised project will not harm them. With sincerity, every problem can be solved. We must think about how to utilise approximately 26 tmcft of water. This cannot happen in a day. It is a long process and we must be prepared. We must engage in politics to demand water for our district but the struggle must be non-partisan. When Maharashtra opposed the move to raise the Almatti dam height, all of their party members united. In the Cauvery issue, all political leaders in Tamil Nadu stand together. Likewise, to ensure drinking water for our farmers, everyone must unite. We must form a committee with all MLAs, farmer leaders and get the blessings of swamijis to take this forward,' he said.
The BJP MP said that obstacles will come but they must overcome them to reach the goal. Nothing is greater than people's power. That people's power has emerged here. Just as small streams join to form a river, the Bedti stream will merge with the Tungabhadra to become a great river. The former MP Manjunath Konnur has played a big role in keeping the Bedti-Varada struggle going. Though he has faced political difficulties, God will bless his stand for the cause. Even if our views differ, the goal is the same and it must be achieved together. Positive politics will begin in Haveri district. The Bedti-Varada river linking must happen,' he said.
Seers of some religious maths, political leaders, farmers leaders and others were present.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
23 minutes ago
- Time of India
TMC slams BJP over ‘citizenship' status of its 2 Bongaon MLAs
1 2 3 4 Kolkata: A fresh controversy has erupted over the citizenship status of two BJP MLAs in Bongaon, ratcheting up the political temperature between Trinamool and BJP over the special intensive revision (SIR) of poll rolls. The names of the MLAs' parents are missing from the recently published Bengal 2002 SIR data. The issue surfaced after the TMC-backed faction of All India Matua Mahasangha submitted a deputation to the Bongaon sub-divisional officer (SDO) on Tuesday, demanding the disqualification of Bongaon North MLA Ashok Kirtaniya. The organisation alleged that while the 2002 electoral roll contains the MLA's name — then a resident of Ghatbaur panchayat — it does not include the names of his father or other family members. The Mahasangha claimed Kirtaniya's father entered India illegally after 2010. Prosenjit Biswas, representing the Mahasangha, said: "We will approach the Union home minister and assembly speaker seeking Ashok Kirtaniya's disqualification as an MLA." Bongaon district TMC president Biswajit Das said, "Usually, the father's name appears in the voter list before the son's. Here, the son was registered first, the father later. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Egypt Solar Panels: See How Much It Will Cost To Install Them (See Prices) Solar Panel | Search Ads Learn More Undo Let Kirtaniya prove this. BJP should act." You Can Also Check: Kolkata AQI | Weather in Kolkata | Bank Holidays in Kolkata | Public Holidays in Kolkata | Gold Rates Today in Kolkata | Silver Rates Today in Kolkata In response, Kirtaniya presented documents, including his father's 1950 border slip and a 1993 voter list entry, as proof of citizenship. "Let TMC say what they want. I have all documents. They are making these allegations only to harass me," he said. Before this row could settle, similar allegations emerged against Bongaon South BJP MLA Swapan Majumdar. Trinamool accused him of being a Bangladeshi national, claiming that neither he nor his parents were listed in the 2002 rolls. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya, youth president of Bongaon's TMC's organisational district, lodged a written complaint with the SDO and also shared documents with the media. These included two Bangladeshi records — one from April 2022 in which the chairman of Nizamuddin Union Parishad claimed that Majumdar's family members were residents of Nishchintapur village in Gopalganj, and another from 1996 showing his father, Santosh Kumar Majumdar, as the seller in a land deed. TMC alleged that Majumdar moved to India after 2002 and illegally enrolled in the voter list in Palla under Gopalnagar PS. Denying the allegations, Majumdar said: "My father passed away before 2002. I moved to Mumbai for work, so I couldn't be physically present during voter list hearings, which is why my name was added later. I possess all necessary documents proving my Indian citizenship. TMC is trying to shield infiltrator Rohingya and grant citizenship to refugees." Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area.
The Hindu
33 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Can a Secular State Build Temples? Bihar Poses the Test
Published : Aug 12, 2025 17:59 IST - 8 MINS READ Can the Indian state build a temple or a mosque? Perhaps the question needs to be reframed. In the present context, imagining the state building a mosque appears absurd. On and after December 6, 1992, it was made amply clear that the Indian state can indeed assist in the destruction of a mosque. It was once declared in an act of bravado that the state would rebuild the mosque, which was demolished in a criminal act, as clarified by the Supreme Court nearly 25 years after the crime was committed. That obviously was never to happen. What was done instead was to usurp the land of the mosque legally for the construction of a temple. By 2025, we have come to realise that the state has consistently taken many leaps. It uses different excuses to make mosques controversial, as we see it doing in the cases of the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi and the Shahi Eidgah of Mathura. It is even agreeable to participate in their removal directly or indirectly. The Uttarakhand government has not taken any steps to prevent the demolition of hundreds of mazars in the State. It has instead come out with justification of the crime by claiming that the mazars are part of the land grab conspiracy (land jihad, as they love to call it), and it is fair to free the pious land. Therefore, we must instead ask: 'Can the Indian state build a temple? Does it have the constitutional authority or sanction to do so?' The powers and rights of the state and the government are derived from the Constitution. To the question, 'Can the state construct a religious site?', the constitutional answer is unambiguous: 'NO'. India is a secular republic. It cannot promote or patronise any one religion. It cannot engage directly in religious activity. However, the state does have a role in maintaining public order when religion enters the public sphere. Its involvement in facilitating the Amarnath Yatra or ensuring the peaceful conduct of Ram Navami processions stems from this duty. Providing logistical support such as transportation, temporary shelter, or repairing roads to pilgrimage sites falls within this ambit. But the state is not to go beyond this. Also Read | Kanwar Yatra's transformation into political weapon And yet, we know that Prime Ministers shoot arrows at Ravana during Ramlilas, and Chief Ministers participate in the Jagannath Rath Yatra. Now governments shower flowers on Kanwariyas! Or police officers are seen massaging the feet of the Kanwariyas. That is obviously going too far. But if we leave aside these egregious acts, we know that Indian secularism is not puritanical; it acknowledges and respects religiosity. Therefore, a Chief Minister participating in a Rath Yatra or attending Eid prayers ought not to raise eyebrows. It is often believed that such gestures nurture communal harmony. After all, when Diwali is celebrated at the White House or 10 Downing Street, Hindus in India too feel a sense of joy and inclusion. But this does not answer the core question: 'Can the state go further and build a religious site?' The Ayodhya verdict This question first emerged when the Supreme Court, in its Ayodhya verdict, awarded the site of the demolished Babri Masjid for the construction of a Ram temple. Even then, a certain fig leaf of propriety was maintained: the construction was handed over to a trust, not undertaken directly by the government. The state was asked to form the trust. But it was not directly made responsible for the construction of the temple. Also, apparently, state funds were not used. Still, the credit for the temple was claimed by the BJP. The Prime Minister was thanked for the court's verdict. At the inauguration, he played the role of the principal yajman. The temple's consecration was converted into a state event, rightly criticised as not only the inauguration of a temple, but the symbolic inauguration of a Hindu Rashtra. Since we did not pause long enough to reckon with that moment, we are now forced to confront the same question again. Just days ago, in Sitamarhi, Bihar, the State government initiated the construction of a grand Sita temple. Chief Minister Nitish Kumar and Union Home Minister Amit Shah participated in the bhoomi pujan at 'Punaura Dham', believed to be Sita's birthplace. Both acted as chief yajmans in this religious ceremony. Before the event, the Bihar government ran full-page advertisements in nearly every newspaper for at least three days, announcing its plans for the comprehensive development of the temple and its precincts. It has acquired 50 acres of land for Rs.165.57 crore, and has earmarked Rs.882.87 crore for the project. This number will undoubtedly increase. Periodic advertisements—each costing lakhs, if not crores—will accompany the progress of this project. Can the Bihar government do this? Can a secular state extend such unambiguous patronage to one particular religion? This is a question that the media ought to have asked, and political parties in Bihar, too, should have done that. But the media, silenced by advertisement revenue and its growing alignment with the BJP and the State government, has abdicated its responsibility. Otherwise, it could have posed a simple question: 'Why are taxpayers' funds being used to build a site belonging to a particular religion?' Hindutva and public indifference No one objected to Amit Shah or Nitish Kumar attending the event in a personal capacity. But how can they act as chief yajmans while holding public office? How can the state itself build a temple? India's political landscape is now so deeply suffused with Hindutva that even self-professed secular parties lack the courage to ask these questions. More troubling still is the public indifference. As a society, we no longer find these questions necessary. No one now reminds us that, in the early years of Independence, Mahatma Gandhi had opposed the use of public funds for the renovation of the Somnath temple. Prime Minister Nehru had even objected to President Rajendra Prasad attending the temple inauguration. At the temple's groundbreaking in Sitamarhi, hundreds of sadhus were in attendance. Was their travel and accommodation arranged by the state too? The media ought to have shown interest in such questions. But to do so, it must reacquaint itself with the basic principle that India is a secular republic. That Nitish Kumar has occasionally donned a Muslim skullcap offers no defence of his current actions. Nor is this the only instance. The Bihar Transport Department has announced that it will subsidise fares for people travelling to and from the State during the 'festive season lasting three months'—specifically for Durga Puja, Diwali, Chhath, and Holi. Its calculation is wrong. From Durga Puja to Holi is not three months, but nearly six months of the calendar year. 'If the fate of Bihar's people was truly tied to a temple, why have they been made to endure Nitish Kumar's government for nearly two decades and the BJP's at the Centre for 11 years?' Why is public money being used exclusively to support Hindu festivals? Again, this policy was advertised in full-page newspaper ads, the cost of which must also be counted. Governments often justify such expenditures under the guise of 'religious tourism'. They argue that these initiatives generate revenue for the state and also provide employment to local people residing in those religiously significant places. Thus, the state's participation in religious activity is repackaged as secular—a convenient fabrication. The devotee earns spiritual merit, and the state earns money: a win-win, apparently. But would the state demonstrate the same generosity during Eid or Bakrid? Does it do so? Shortly after Nitish Kumar returned to power, one saw advertisements inviting people to perform pind-daan in Gaya. The Bihar government was essentially claiming that performing these Hindu rituals in Gaya would liberate the souls of ancestors. Clearly, it was peddling spiritual inducements, positioning Gaya as a rival to Kashi—as though salvation were a matter of competitive marketing. That it can do this is a reflection of how deeply eroded public consciousness has become around the idea of a secular state. In the past eleven years, governments have participated so often and so directly in Hindu religious events that it now appears normal. Sita temple: Spiritual or political endeavour? The announcement of the Ram temple in Ayodhya had triggered protests from opposition parties in Bihar, who claimed that Sita was being ignored—that she was not being given an equal place alongside Ram. Thus began the groundwork for a Sita temple in Sitamarhi. Now, that project is under way. At its inauguration, the Union Home Minister declared that this was not merely the beginning of a temple but the beginning of Bihar and Mithila's fortune. But if the fate of Bihar's people was truly tied to a temple, why have they been made to endure Nitish Kumar's government for nearly two decades and the BJP's at the Centre for 11 years? Also Read | Mohan Bhagwat's call for religious harmony reflects the duplicity of RSS Is the Sita temple a spiritual endeavour, or a political one? The Home Minister made it clear. Its purpose or objective is entirely worldly. Instead of speaking about why Sita is significant to the Hindu mind, he used the occasion to attack the opposition and criticise their objections to the Special Intensive Revision, the recent drive by the Election Commission to update the election lists. He vowed to keep out 'infiltrators'. This was not a religious speech; it was a political campaign speech. It confirmed what many had suspected—this temple is a part of a Hindutva political project, akin to the Ram temple in Ayodhya. It has nothing to do with devotion to Ram or Sita. The only discernible development is this: Nitish Kumar has now enthusiastically joined the BJP's Hindutva project. Apoorvanand teaches Hindi at Delhi University and writes literary and cultural criticism.
Hindustan Times
38 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
SC stray dog order spotlights poor pet registration in Delhi
The Supreme Court's recent directive to relocate stray dogs in Delhi-NCR has put the spotlight on another long-standing problem — the capital's dismal pet dog registration rate. Despite it being mandatory under Section 399 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation (MCD) Act, only 5,767 pet dogs are registered in the city, with 381 applications pending, according to MCD data. The Supreme Court ruling on Monday had outright rejected the idea of stray dogs being adopted. It focused solely on relocation of community dogs and made no specific directive on pet dog registration. (AFP/Representational image) Officials warn that this gap leaves a dangerous grey area between pets and strays, opening the door to disputes and misuse of the complaint system. 'Registration and the token serve as proof of ownership. With the recent SC judgment, we expect a surge in applications, especially for adopted indigenous breeds,' said a senior MCD official. Non-registration can attract fines and prosecution under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita dealing with negligent behaviour with respect to animals. The Act also allows detention of unregistered dogs found in public places, a step veterinary officials say is rarely enforced. Experts warn that poor compliance risks deepening confusion and triggering disputes. Gauri Maulekhi, activist and trustee at People for Animals (PFA), said the lack of registration creates a grey area between pets and community dogs. 'Some people collar strays, keep them indoors for long periods, or adopt indies as full-fledged pets. If neither strays nor pets are tagged, it's bound to cause confusion,' she said, adding that this could even pit neighbours against each other. 'A neighbour might report my dog as a stray, or conversely, collar a stray and claim it's a long-time pet.' The Supreme Court ruling on Monday had outright rejected the idea of stray dogs being adopted. It focused solely on relocation of community dogs and made no specific directive on pet dog registration. Asher Jesudoss, whose 2022 plea in the Delhi high court led to the creation of the Delhi Animal Welfare Board, said that since very few dogs are registered in Delhi, one can find it difficult to differentiate between pets and strays. 'As the name suggests, community dogs are those that belong to the entire community. But nothing stops an individual from collaring the stray and taking it indoors and keeping it as a pet. As per our rules, all breeds and dogs need to be registered. MCD needs to register all pets as proving ownership otherwise becomes tricky,' he said. Pet registration can be done online, with a uniform ₹500 fee. A veterinary official said actual registrations are far below the real number of pets. 'We issue a brass token for the dog's collar, which also lets us track vaccination status,' the official added.
