Banakacherla project: What is the latest water dispute between Andhra Pradesh and Telangana
Telangana Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy on Tuesday (June 24) challenged former state CM and Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) leader K Chandrashekar Rao to a debate in the state Assembly over the contentious Banakacherla reservoir project.
The BRS has been criticising the Congress government in the state for 'allowing' the neighbouring Andhra Pradesh to go ahead with the project. Revanth Reddy said the debate would be about who actually compromised Telangana's water interests.
Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu has announced his plan to link the Godavari River with the Penna River through the Krishna River and build a massive reservoir at Banakacherla in Nandyal district. The Telangana government, opposing the project vociferously, has said it violates the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014.
The Banakacherla reservoir project is meant to transform Andhra Pradesh's drought-prone Rayalaseema region into a fertile land.
As per the project, the first step would be to enhance the Polavaram Right Main Canal's capacity from 17,500 cusecs to 38,000 cusecs to allow the transfer of Godavari water to Krishna.
Then, the capacity of Thatipudi Lift Irrigation Scheme's canal will be increased from 1,400 cusecs to 10,000 cusecs.
A reservoir will then be constructed at Bollapalli in Guntur district, from where water will be lifted at a rate of 28,000 cusecs for transferring to the Banakacherla reservoir. Lift stations will be established at Harischandrapuram, Lingapuram, Vyyandana, Gangireddypalem, and Nakirekallu to pump water to the Bollapalli reservoir. The water will then be diverted to the Veligonda reservoir and Banakacherla reservoir via a tunnel passing through the Nallamala forest.
Chandrababu Naidu's main claim is that the water being diverted to Banakacherla is surplus water from the Godavari.
Why is Telangana opposing the project?
Telangana's CM Revanth Reddy and Minister for Irrigation Uttam Kumar Reddy have written to Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman and Jal Shakti Minister CR Patil, stating that the Banakacherla project violates the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh State Reorganisation Act, 2014.
The project should be kept in abeyance because it has not yet received approval from the Apex Council managing the Krishna River Management Board (KRMB) and the Godavari River Management Board (GRMB), and the Central Water Commission, they have claimed.
Telangana has contended that the Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal has ruled on 1,486 TMCft of Godavari between Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, of which Telangana was allotted 968 TMCft. The tribunal did not determine the extent of surplus water in the river, and hence Banakacherla project will be a threat to Telangana's water security, it has claimed.
Diverting Godavari waters to Banakacherla will affect the water projects of the state, Telangana has said.
Why is this a political bone of contention?
Chandrababu Naidu's interest in the Banakacherla project is with an aim to consolidate his power in the Rayalaseema region, a bastion of his Telugu Desam Party's rival YSR Congress Party. If the water crisis in this region is sorted, TDP hopes to reap rich electoral dividends here.
In Telangana, however, the issue is emotive. Telangana was carved out of AP in 2014, after many years of agitation for separate statehood. Water-sharing was the heart of this agitation. It was contended during the agitation that Telangana's water resources were being diverted to Andhra Pradesh because of regional disparities. Building a reservoir to divert water from the Godavari to Andhra Pradesh has thus opened old wounds.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
3 hours ago
- The Hindu
Congress's 18-month-rule a golden period for Telangana: TPCC chief
Terming the 18-month Congress rule in the State a golden period, Telangana Pradesh Congress Committee (TPCC) president Mahesh Kumar Goud slammed the Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) for resorting to mudslinging against the government as it is unable to digest the government's welfare and development-oriented approach. He also reiterated his party's commitment to doing justice to the Backwards Classes (BCs) by discussing the issue of ensuring 42% representation of BCs in local body elections within the party. Speaking to the media at Gandhi Bhavan on Wednesday, Mr. Mahesh Kumar said that the Congress is prepared to organise an open debate on its 18 months of rule. Regarding local body elections, Mr. Mahesh Kumar emphasized that they would be conducted in accordance with the court's judgment and assured that the Congress is committed to providing reservations for BCs in local body elections. He also criticised BJP leaders for their silence on BC reservations, underscoring the Congress's commitment to this cause. Mr. Mahesh Kumar highlighted the party's achievements, including disbursals of ₹9,000 crore into farmers' accounts under Rythu Bharosa and allocating ₹1.04 lakh crore for farmer welfare. He emphasised the Congress government's pro-farmer stance and its efforts to satisfy all sections of society. Mr. Goud accused the BRS's social media of spreading false narratives and raised questions about the BRS's role in certain projects, such as the Pothiretar project and the Krishna water issue. He also accused BRS MLC K. Kavitha of trying to utilise the BC cause and issues related to women for political gain. Looking ahead to the GHMC elections and the Jubilee Hills by-election, the MLC expressed confidence in the Congress's victory, stating that the party would win whenever there are elections in the State. The TPCC president announced that AICC president Mallikarjun Kharge would visit Hyderabad on July 4, and the Political Affairs Committee (PAC) of the party would be convened on the same day.
Indian Express
4 hours ago
- Indian Express
Bombay HC rejects plea claiming ‘discrepancies' during 2024 Maharashtra polls, ‘high percentage of votes after 6 pm'
The Bombay High Court on Wednesday dismissed a plea raising concerns over alleged discrepancies in the voting process on November 20, 2024, the polling day for the Maharashtra Assembly elections, including 'unusually high percentage of votes' cast during the final minutes and after the closing hour of 6 pm. 'We have no manner of doubt that the petition is required to be summarily rejected. It is accordingly rejected. The hearing of this petition practically has taken the whole day, leaving aside our urgent cause list and for such reason it would certainly warrant dismissal with costs. However, we refrain from doing so,' the high court held. The bench of Justices Girish S Kulkarni and Arif S Doctor passed the order on a writ plea by city resident Chetan Chandrakant Ahire who claimed that over 75 lakh votes were polled after the official voting time of 6 pm, and several discrepancies were found in over 90 constituencies where the number of votes counted did not match with those polled, and there was no transparency in the process. The high court had on Monday concluded the hearing on contentions related to the maintainability of the plea and had noted that it will pass an order on Wednesday, June 25. The plea sought directions from the court to the Election Commission of India (ECI) to disclose the exact number of tokens distributed to voters after 6 pm at each polling station, and the total tokens distributed across all constituency segments. It also sought a declaration of the total votes cast and polled after 6 pm, and in the end sought that results declared by the respective returning officers (ROs) of each Assembly constituency be made 'null and void' due to non-compliance of norms and procedural lapses. The plea also sought immediate withdrawal of the election certificates issued by such ROs. Advocate Prakash Ambedkar, representing Ahire, on Monday argued that there was no transparent system for recording or verifying the authenticity of the 75 lakh votes and the ROs failed to comply with the guidelines in the ECI's 'handbook' for conducting elections and did not report discrepancies to the ECI. The bench queried whether the practice of coupons or tokens being given to those who voted beyond 6 pm was followed during the Lok Sabha elections and asked what was the difference during Assembly elections. 'Why did you not contend this during the Lok Sabha elections? Is that your case that the said practice (of giving coupons or tokens) was always available, but was not during Assembly elections? Is it a standard practice, and how was there a departure this time (Assembly elections) from earlier practice? That statement is not there in your petition. That's the whole thing,' the bench stated. Ambedkar said that while the statement concerned was not there in the petition, the apprehension was that those elected were not chosen through a free and fair election as it was manipulated with the 'deceit' by officials. 'A fraud on the Constitution cannot be allowed to remain,' Ambedkar argued, claiming that the ECI should come forward with documents to restore the shaken faith of commoners. The bench said that it was a grey area as to who got the votes polled after 6 pm. 'It may be the case that a single vote was not cast in favour of an elected candidate. How do we know? This is all uncertain.' Senior advocate Ashutosh Kumbhakoni, representing the ECI, however, raised preliminary objection on the maintainability of the plea stating that the petitioner had no locus standi (legal standing) to approach the court, the elected candidates were not made party to the plea, and the election cannot be set aside 'behind their back'. He added that the elections were conducted as per due procedures across over 1 lakh polling booths in 288 constituencies in Maharashtra. Advocate Uday Warunjikar, representing the central government, opposed the writ plea claiming that the petitioner could have filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) as he did not contest the elections or an election petition could have been filed within 45 days since the declaration of results by a candidate, however, the said period is over.
Indian Express
5 hours ago
- Indian Express
Banakacherla project: What is the latest water dispute between Andhra Pradesh and Telangana
Telangana Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy on Tuesday (June 24) challenged former state CM and Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) leader K Chandrashekar Rao to a debate in the state Assembly over the contentious Banakacherla reservoir project. The BRS has been criticising the Congress government in the state for 'allowing' the neighbouring Andhra Pradesh to go ahead with the project. Revanth Reddy said the debate would be about who actually compromised Telangana's water interests. Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu has announced his plan to link the Godavari River with the Penna River through the Krishna River and build a massive reservoir at Banakacherla in Nandyal district. The Telangana government, opposing the project vociferously, has said it violates the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014. The Banakacherla reservoir project is meant to transform Andhra Pradesh's drought-prone Rayalaseema region into a fertile land. As per the project, the first step would be to enhance the Polavaram Right Main Canal's capacity from 17,500 cusecs to 38,000 cusecs to allow the transfer of Godavari water to Krishna. Then, the capacity of Thatipudi Lift Irrigation Scheme's canal will be increased from 1,400 cusecs to 10,000 cusecs. A reservoir will then be constructed at Bollapalli in Guntur district, from where water will be lifted at a rate of 28,000 cusecs for transferring to the Banakacherla reservoir. Lift stations will be established at Harischandrapuram, Lingapuram, Vyyandana, Gangireddypalem, and Nakirekallu to pump water to the Bollapalli reservoir. The water will then be diverted to the Veligonda reservoir and Banakacherla reservoir via a tunnel passing through the Nallamala forest. Chandrababu Naidu's main claim is that the water being diverted to Banakacherla is surplus water from the Godavari. Why is Telangana opposing the project? Telangana's CM Revanth Reddy and Minister for Irrigation Uttam Kumar Reddy have written to Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman and Jal Shakti Minister CR Patil, stating that the Banakacherla project violates the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh State Reorganisation Act, 2014. The project should be kept in abeyance because it has not yet received approval from the Apex Council managing the Krishna River Management Board (KRMB) and the Godavari River Management Board (GRMB), and the Central Water Commission, they have claimed. Telangana has contended that the Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal has ruled on 1,486 TMCft of Godavari between Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, of which Telangana was allotted 968 TMCft. The tribunal did not determine the extent of surplus water in the river, and hence Banakacherla project will be a threat to Telangana's water security, it has claimed. Diverting Godavari waters to Banakacherla will affect the water projects of the state, Telangana has said. Why is this a political bone of contention? Chandrababu Naidu's interest in the Banakacherla project is with an aim to consolidate his power in the Rayalaseema region, a bastion of his Telugu Desam Party's rival YSR Congress Party. If the water crisis in this region is sorted, TDP hopes to reap rich electoral dividends here. In Telangana, however, the issue is emotive. Telangana was carved out of AP in 2014, after many years of agitation for separate statehood. Water-sharing was the heart of this agitation. It was contended during the agitation that Telangana's water resources were being diverted to Andhra Pradesh because of regional disparities. Building a reservoir to divert water from the Godavari to Andhra Pradesh has thus opened old wounds.
