CWPRS report clears Kaleshwaram barrages, BRS claims Cong-BJP plot
BRS asserts that CWPRS findings show no major issues at Annaram and Sundilla barrages and argue a political conspiracy by Congress and BJP to tarnish Telangana's Kaleshwaram project. They propose repair-led reactivation of Medigadda and use of pump houses to irrigate lands during an El Nino year.
Key takeaways
- BRS asserts CWPRS report found no major issues at Annaram and Sundilla barrages.
- Proposed actions include repairing Medigadda and using the Kannepalli pump house to move water upstream to Yellampally.
- BRS accuses Congress and BJP of a wider conspiracy related to Krishna river water sharing and Srisailam/Nagarjunasagar dynamics.
- ALLEGATIONS include a 140 tmc ft diversion to the Penna Basin and a potential 110 tmc ft surplus if Srisailam water had been released for hydroelectric generation.
What Happened
The Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) says a CWPRS analysis has undercut accusations against the Kaleshwaram project barrages, arguing that Annaram and Sundilla barrages do not have major structural issues. The party’s leader G. Jagadish Reddy described the CWPRS report as clearing the barrages, while suggesting repairs to the Medigadda pier cofferdams could allow it to be put back into use. The BRS spokesperson asserted a plan to operate the Kannepalli pump house without storing water in Medigadda, with the pumped water directed into Yellampally via upstream pump houses near Annaram and Sundilla to water extensive lands across several districts during an El Nino year.
On water sharing from the Krishna basin, the BRS claimed that the Congress-led Telangana government allowed Andhra Pradesh to divert 140 tmc ft of water through Pothireddypadu and other channels into the Penna Basin, even amid drought conditions in Telangana’s Krishna Basin. The party argued that all Andhra Pradesh systems drawing water from Srisailam are flood-water-driven, yet AP diverted water before Srisailam and Nagarjunasagar would have become surplus if Srisailam’s water had been released for hydroelectric generation, which, they claimed, could have yielded about 110 tmc ft more water for Nagarjunasagar. The BRS suggested this would have enabled water delivery to the Left Canal ayacut.
Why It Matters
The BRS frames the CWPRS findings as a political win and uses the report to counter opposition claims about the Kaleshwaram project’s viability. By pointing to a potential switch to pump-based water distribution and to cross-basin water sharing, the party signals possible shifts in how water from major Telangana projects might be managed to address drought-like conditions during an El Nino year. The critique of Andhra Pradesh’s use of shared water resources also deepens the inter-state dimension of water governance surrounding the Kaleshwaram scheme.
Background
The Kaleshwaram project includes multiple barrages, notably Annaram, Sundilla and Medigadda, with linked water conveyance infrastructure. The plan discussed by the BRS involves using pump houses to move water upstream and into the Yellampally system. The argument also touches on the Srisailam reservoir and its role in cross-basin water sharing with Nagarjunasagar, and how decisions on water release and storage influence downstream ayacuts and hydel generation strategies. The elapsed debate centers on whether political leadership at the state and central levels influenced the handling of these infrastructure and water-allocation issues.
Key Facts
- The BRS claims CWPRS report states Annaram and Sundilla barrages have no major issues.
- The Medigadda barrage could be brought back into use by constructing a cofferdam upstream and performing repairs on damaged piers.
- The BRS proposes using Kannepalli pump house without water storage in Medigadda, pumping to Yellampally via upstream pump houses near Annaram and Sundilla to irrigate lands in multiple districts during an El Nino year.
- The BRS alleges Congress in Telangana and the BJP-led central government allowed Andhra Pradesh to divert 140 tmc ft of water through Pothireddypadu and other systems into the Penna Basin.
- It asserts all AP water from Srisailam systems is flood-water-driven but that AP diversion occurred before Srisailam and Nagarjunasagar became surplus, with a counter-claim about potential surplus if Srisailam water had been released for hydroelectric generation, estimated at 110 tmc ft.
What Happens Next
The article does not specify any scheduled steps or official next actions tied to the CWPRS findings beyond the BRS’s stated interpretations and proposed operational adjustments. Further developments would depend on official assessments, inter-state negotiations, and implementation of any proposed cofferdam and pump-based water-transfer plans.
Sources reviewed
Project Chintan independently synthesized and analyzed information cross-checked across the sources listed above.
Related stories
Pralhad Joshi accuses Congress of undermining national integrity for vote-bank appeasement
Congress questions prorogation delay, questions 2/3 majority for delimitation bill
Chintha Jerome: CPI(M)’s young face from Kollam
