Polavaram-Banakacherla Link Project. (File Photo)
Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh firm on Polavaram–Banakacherla link project at Jal Shakti meet

Andhra Pradesh clarified that the scheme was designed only to utilise surplus floodwaters that would otherwise flow into the sea, after upper riparian states had already drawn their share.

S Guru Srikanth

VIJAYAWADA: The first meeting of the inter-state water disputes committee between Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, chaired by the Central Water Commission (CWC) chairman, concluded today with Andhra Pradesh taking a firm stance on the Polavaram–Banakacherla link project (Nalamallasagar project).

Sources said that during the deliberations, CWC officials presented the agenda submitted by Andhra Pradesh in the form of a detailed presentation.

Telangana, however, had not submitted any agenda, and the CWC chairman asked its representatives to explain their position directly. Telangana officials questioned how permissions could be granted for diverting floodwaters from Polavaram to the Banakacharla project.

Andhra Pradesh clarified that the scheme was designed only to utilise surplus floodwaters that would otherwise flow into the sea, after upper riparian states had already drawn their share.

The CWC chairman supported this view, asking Telangana representatives what objection could exist if Andhra Pradesh used waters that would otherwise go to waste.

Officials from Andhra Pradesh further pointed out that when permissions were granted for projects like Kaleshwaram and Seetharama Sagar without AP’s consent, no disputes were raised, and questioned why objections were surfacing now over Banakacharla.

It was reiterated that the scheme involves only 200 TMC of surplus floodwaters, causing no harm to upper states, and urged the CWC to issue clear guidelines on the distribution of surplus waters in both the Krishna and Godavari rivers.

Officials who attended the meeting shared that Telangana pressed for Krishna river waters to be shared equally in a 50:50 ratio instead of the current 66:34 ad hoc arrangement.

They said they had rejected this demand, stating it was contrary to the Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal (KWDT) award and Apex Council decisions, and therefore not feasible.

Sunetra to be sworn in Maharashtra Dy CM today, uncertainty on merger

INTERVIEW | Naïve protectionism under UPA cost India billions: Goyal

Medical colleges miss SC order on interns’ stipend, NMC missing in action

Explain rationale of pilot duty relaxation norms: Delhi HC to DGCA

Stem cell treatment for autism malpractice, only clinical trials allowed: SC

SCROLL FOR NEXT