Uttam: Revival of Tummidihatti has begun
Hyderabad: As promised in its election manifesto, the Congress government is expediting the preparation of detailed project report (DPR) for Tummidihatti barrage under the revived Pranahita–Chevella Lift Irrigation scheme.
State Advisor (Irrigation) Adityanath Das is reviewing the feasibility of reviving the original Tummidihatti-based Pranahita-Chevella project, Irrigation Minister N Uttam Kumar Reddy said on Tuesday. He said the finalization of the DPR will be the first step towards executing the Pranahita project which was scrapped by the previous BRS government.
Making a PowerPoint presentation on the NDSA report on damaged Medigadda, Annaram and Sundilla barrages of Kaleshwaram project, the minister came down heavily on former Chief Minister K Chandrashekhar Rao for disbanding the ambitious Pranahita project for commissions through the launch of Kaleshwaram project.
'KCR reengineered and redesigned the Pranahita project as Kaleshwaram only for commissions. The scraping of the Pranahita project cost Nizamabad and Adilabad district heavily. The government is committed to revive Pranahita and address irrigation needs of the two old big districts,' the minister said.
Uttam said that it was outrageous and shameful that KCR, instead of accepting responsibility, was now attacking the credibility of the NDSA and questioning its authority. 'When we recently approached the Union Ministry of Jal Shakti, seeking clearance for the Sitarama Sagar project, the officials refused to consider it because our irrigation system had collapsed,' he added.
Reiterating that his government will take a decision on the implementation of the NDSA recommendations in the Cabinet meeting soon, the minister said the Kaleshwaram project was not based on scientific principles but on a campaign of lies, propaganda, and false publicity. He reminded the public that the original plan was Dr BR Ambedkar Pranahita-Chevella Project at Tummidihatti, for which even the then TRS government had sought national project status.
He pointed out that the barrages were originally designed to regulate just 2 TMC of river water. However, over 10 TMC was stored in each, driven purely by a publicity agenda, causing foundational damage and eventual collapse. 'The Kaleshwaram collapse is not a natural tragedy. It is a direct result of the BRS government's irresponsible decisions.
It has dealt a serious blow to Telangana's finances and to the lives of farmers. Telangana is paying Rs 16,000 crore every year just in loan repayments for this failed project. This is public money lost due to a political stunt.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
25 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
US court pauses ruling allowing Venezuelans to challenge deportations to El Salvador
-A U.S. appeals court on Tuesday temporarily paused a judge's ruling holding that hundreds of Venezuelans the Trump administration deported to El Salvador under an 18th century wartime law must be given the chance to challenge their detentions. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued an administrative stay to give itself more time to consider an appeal filed by the government earlier on Tuesday. Washington-based U.S. District Judge James Boasberg on June 4 also ruled that the Trump administration must facilitate their legal challenges, though he stopped short of expressly ordering the government to bring the Venezuelan migrants currently being held at a mega-prison in El Salvador back to the U.S. Boasberg, an appointee of Democratic President Barack Obama, gave the government one week to detail how it would facilitate the deportees' challenges, known as habeas corpus petitions. The Venezuelans were deported in March after President Donald Trump, a Republican, invoked the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to swiftly deport alleged members of the Tren de Aragua gang without going through normal immigration procedures. The appellate court panel that paused Boasberg's ruling included U.S. Circuit Judges Gregory Katsas, Neomi Rao and Justin Walker, all of whom were appointed to the court by Trump during his first term in office. The American Civil Liberties Union, which represents the Venezuelans in the case, did not respond immediately to a request for comment.
Hindustan Times
44 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
No compromise on women's dignity: SC tells lawyer who abused judge
The judiciary cannot compromise when it comes to the safety and dignity of women judges, the Supreme Court said on Tuesday, refusing to interfere with the conviction and 18-month jail sentence of a Delhi-based lawyer who verbally abused and threatened a woman judicial officer in court. 'There can be no leniency in ensuring a safe workplace for women judges…Most of the judicial officers in Delhi today are women. They must feel safe at their place of work,' a bench of justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan emphasised. Rejecting an appeal by advocate Sanjay Rathore, the bench added: 'They (women judges) won't be able to function if someone like him gets High Court is right.' The top court's decision comes weeks after the Delhi High Court delivered a scathing verdict, describing Rathore's conduct as 'an assault on justice itself' . The trial court had originally sentenced Rathore to a total of two years' imprisonment for using gendered abuse against a woman magistrate in 2015, but the high court reduced the term to 18 months. Rathore had already undergone six months in jail by the time his appeal was heard in the Supreme Court. His lawyer argued that the incident was a 'spur-of-the-moment' outburst and that further incarceration would be harsh. But the top court remained unmoved. 'Your sentence has already been reduced to 18 months. We can't bring it down. Your matter was duly dealt with by the high court and a strong judgment was issued. We have to ensure the safety of women judicial officers,' the bench said during the hearing. The court also took note of the testimony given under oath by the woman magistrate, who corroborated the charges. 'Look at the kind of language you have used. How will judges work if we entertain your petition?' the bench asked. In its brief order, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and granted Rathore two weeks to surrender. The case dates back to October 2015, when Rathore, aggrieved by an adjournment in his case that was passed in his absence, verbally abused a woman magistrate in Karkardooma court, including using gender-specific slurs. The incident prompted the judicial officer to lodge an FIR at Farsh Bazar police station. In 2023, a trial court found Rathore guilty under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code -- 509 (word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman), 189 (threat of injury to a public servant), and 353 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of duty) -- and sentenced him to two years in jail. The high court, while upholding the conviction in May 2025, modified the sentence to 18 months. In her May 26 judgment, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma of the high court minced no words in rejecting Rathore's plea for leniency. She observed that 'the act of outraging the modesty of a judicial officer while she was presiding over court proceedings… attacks the very foundation of judicial decorum and institutional integrity.' Justice Sharma emphasised that Rathore, being an officer of the court, was expected to uphold its dignity, not undermine it. 'This is not merely a case of individual misbehaviour, but a case where injustice was done to justice itself where a judge… became the target of personal attack while discharging her official duties.' The judgment went on to highlight the larger systemic issue: 'Any act that seeks to threaten or intimidate a judge, especially through gender-specific abuse, is an assault on justice itself and must be met with firm accountability. To trivialise such conduct under the garb of emotional outburst or momentary lapse is to reflect a patriarchal mindset — one that struggles to respect women in authority and seeks to normalise the unacceptable. This cannot be permitted. Not in law. Not in court.' Calling the woman magistrate's experience a reflection of 'a mindset where even women in empowered roles are not seen as immune from humiliation or indignity,' the high court warned that no judicial officer, especially women at the district level who form the 'backbone of our justice delivery system,' should ever feel unsupported or unsafe. 'If a woman holding judicial office is made to feel that her authority is conditional on the civility or restraint of others, the very foundation of judicial independence would get shaken,' Justice Sharma wrote.
Hindustan Times
3 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Harvard may get some of its funding back. But on one condition, says Education Secretary
Education Secretary Linda McMahon said on Tuesday that Harvard and other universities could get back some of the federal funding cut by the Trump administration if they changed their policies. 'It would be my goal that if colleges and universities are abiding by the laws of the United States and doing what we expect of them, that they can expect taxpayer funded programs,' the secretary said at a Bloomberg News event. McMahon said that the Trump administration was "making progress in some of the discussions" with Harvard, despite the ongoing legal battles. The secretary emphasised that the federal funding has a role to play in academic research at the universities. 'I think if we look at our research as for the public good, which I think is intended, then taxpayers are willing to see their tax dollars to support that kind of really good research. And so I'm sure that would continue at the university level,' she said. President Donald Trump has frozen more than $2.6 billion in federal research funding to Harvard and has moved to cancel its federal contracts. The Trump administration justified the actions as part of its effort to eliminate antisemitism on campus. Meanwhile, Harvard has also taken the fight to the court with two lawsuits against the Trump administration, challenging both the loss of federal funding and a decision by the Department of Homeland Security to revoke its license to enrol foreign students. The administration reportedly also asked the university to share its records about misconduct by international students on campus. However, it said that the college has not offered enough information to satisfy their requests. The Trump administration and Harvard have been at loggerheads, with the President repeatedly singling out the institution and taking aim at its perceived left-leaning and admission practices. Trump has proposed that Harvard's federal funding be moved to trade schools and called for its tax-exempt status to be removed. President Donald Trump recently said that the Massachusetts-based school was "starting to behave". Meanwhile, Harvard has rejected the administration's demands that it implement "viewpoint diversity" on campus in its hiring and admission practices. Columbia University has also lost about $400 million in federal funds and did not sign onto the "friend of the court" argument. Other private colleges, including Cornell University, Princeton University and Northwestern University, also have seen funding revoked in the Trump era.
