The project proposes to divert 200 TMCFT of floodwaters from the Godavari at Polavaram to the drought-prone Rayalaseema region in Andhra Pradesh’s Penna basin.
Published Jun 18, 2025 | 9:40 AM ⚊ Updated Jun 18, 2025 | 9:40 AM
Telangana’s opposition, detailed in Reddy’s letters dated 22 January 2025 and 13 June 2025, rests on legal, procedural, and equitable grounds.
Synopsis: Telangana has intensified its opposition to Andhra Pradesh’s proposed Godavari–Banakacherla Link project, citing legal, environmental, and procedural violations, and has convened an all-party MPs’ meeting to urge the Centre to halt its progress.
The inter-state water dispute between Telangana and Andhra Pradesh is escalating, with Telangana Irrigation Minister N Uttam Kumar Reddy raising strong objections to Andhra Pradesh’s proposed Godavari–Banakacherla Link (G-B Link) project.
In letters addressed to Union Jal Shakti Minister CR Patil and Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman – the most recent dated 13 June 2025 – Reddy accused Andhra Pradesh of violating the Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal (GWDT) Award of 1980 and the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act (APRA) of 2014.
The G-B Link project – also referred to as the Godavari–Krishna–Penna Linking Scheme – proposes to divert 200 TMCFT of floodwaters from the Godavari at Polavaram to the drought-prone Rayalaseema region in Andhra Pradesh’s Penna basin.
The project envisages constructing a new reservoir at Bollapalli in Guntur district with a storage capacity of 150 TMCFT.
Andhra Pradesh has pegged the total project cost at ₹80,112 crore, divided into three segments: Godavari to Krishna (₹13,511 crore), Krishna to Bollapalli Reservoir (₹28,560 crore), and Bollapalli to Banakacherla head regulator (₹38,041 crore).
Meanwhile, Andhra Pradesh is actively pushing the project forward, seeking financial assistance from the Centre and having submitted a Pre-Feasibility Report (PFR) to the Central Water Commission (CWC).
Uttam Kumar Reddy has announced that he will convene a meeting of all Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha MPs from Telangana – across party lines – at the Secretariat on Wednesday, 18 June 2025.
Union Minister G Kishan Reddy and Union Minister of State Bandi Sanjay Kumar are among those invited. Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy will also be in attendance.
At the meeting, Reddy will deliver a presentation outlining Telangana’s position and the way forward on the G-B Link project.
Telangana’s opposition, detailed in Reddy’s letters dated 22 January 2025 and 13 June 2025, rests on legal, procedural, and equitable grounds.
Irrigation Minister N Uttam Kumar Reddy argued that the G-B scheme lacks assured water allocations under the 1980 GWDT Award, which allocated 1,486 TMCFT of Godavari waters to the erstwhile undivided Andhra Pradesh.
Reddy stated that waters beyond this allocation remain unquantified and unapportioned, rendering Andhra Pradesh’s plan to divert “flood waters” legally untenable.
“Without such apportionment, it is highly inappropriate for Andhra Pradesh to proceed with projects under the guise of flood waters,” Reddy said, asserting that all riparian states, including Telangana, are entitled to unallocated waters under law.
Reddy further contended that the project violates Part-IX of the APRA 2014, which governs inter-state river water management.
Under APRA, any new project on the Godavari or Krishna rivers requires technical clearance from the CWC, approval from the Godavari River Management Board (GRMB) or Krishna River Management Board (KRMB), and final sanction by the Apex Council, chaired by the Union Jal Shakti Minister.
Telangana claims Andhra Pradesh has bypassed these mandatory steps, failing to obtain clearances from the CWC, GRMB, KRMB, or the Apex Council.
“The Government of Andhra Pradesh is proposing to undertake the Godavari–Banakacherla Link Scheme without adhering to Sections 85(8)(d) and 84(3) of APRA 2014,” Reddy stated.
Telangana has also flagged procedural irregularities related to the PFR.
At a meeting held on 2 June 2025, chaired by Additional Secretary (Finance Ministry) Sajjan Yadav and attended by Senior Joint Commissioner (MoJS) Amit Kumar Jha, Andhra Pradesh officials were asked to submit a Detailed Project Report (DPR) by the end of June.
Reddy argued that this request implies CWC approval of the PFR – a step that typically precedes the DPR submission.
“We strongly object to the Centre asking the Andhra Pradesh Government to submit the DPR,” Reddy wrote, urging the CWC to reject the PFR outright and prevent Andhra Pradesh from issuing tenders or progressing further.
The Minister emphasised the potential impact on Telangana’s water rights, especially in drought-prone regions.
“Allowing such a project would undermine the equitable and judicious management of inter-state river waters and set a precedent contrary to statutory frameworks and natural justice,” he warned.
He pointed out that Telangana has several pending projects based on its assured 968 TMCFT water allocation under the GWDT, which, he insisted, must be cleared before considering Andhra Pradesh’s proposals based on unallocated waters.
Uttam Kumar Reddy has also written to Union Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav, urging the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) to reject the Terms of Reference (ToR) sought by Andhra Pradesh for the modified Polavaram Irrigation Project (PIP).
He alleged that Andhra Pradesh’s actions represent consistent violations of environmental clearances and tribunal allocations, calling them detrimental to riparian interests and legally untenable.
In a letter on Monday, Reddy said Andhra Pradesh has made significant deviations in both the Krishna and Godavari basins by expanding several components of the PIP in violation of permissions granted under the GWDTA and the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC).
He noted that the Polavaram project originally received Environmental Clearance from the MoEF under letter No. J-12011/74/2005-IA-1 dated 25 October 2005.
However, Andhra Pradesh later implemented extensive changes without obtaining fresh clearance, prompting the Ministry to issue a ‘Stop Work Order’ on 8 February 2011.
Although the order was issued due to unapproved changes in project scope, it has been repeatedly kept in abeyance – most recently extended until 2 July 2026 – allowing work to continue despite objections from Telangana, Odisha, and Chhattisgarh.
The Minister further noted that while the Polavaram project, after being accorded “National Project” status, continues to receive reimbursement for expenditures, such reimbursement applies only to components approved under the original scope.
“Yet the Andhra Pradesh government has proceeded with major infrastructural modifications,” he wrote.
In his communication, Reddy warned that Andhra Pradesh has exceeded the approved parameters.
“The connectivity to draw water from the head sluice of the Polavaram Right Main Canal (PIPRMC) is now designed for 40,000 cusecs, while the original design was for 20,000 cusecs.
Twin tunnels, each with a discharge capacity of 20,000 cusecs, are under construction, and the infrastructure at the headworks has already been created accordingly,” he pointed out.
He added that the PIPRMC is being executed with a drawal capacity of 17,560 cusecs, against the DPR-approved 11,654 cusecs. Similarly, the Polavaram Left Main Canal (PIPLMC) is being constructed with a capacity of 17,560 cusecs, though only 8,123 cusecs were originally approved.
He stressed that these changes in drawal capacities and “extensive alterations in the dimensional features of the project components” amount to a complete redesign of the project, undertaken without requisite clearances or approvals.
Andhra Pradesh, led by Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu, is continuing its push to secure approvals and funding for the G-B Link scheme.
In letters dated 15 November 2024 and 31 December 2024 to Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, Naidu sought financial support under Sections 46(2) and 46(3) of APRA 2014, which provide for development grants to backward regions.
He argued that the third segment of the project, aimed at Rayalaseema’s drought-affected districts, qualifies for such grants and requested budgetary support in 2025–26.
On 29 December 2024, the Chief Minister made a presentation to the media, describing the project’s potential to transform Rayalaseema by harnessing Godavari floodwaters. Andhra Pradesh has also submitted the PFR to the CWC and participated in the 2 June 2025 meeting with Finance and MoJS officials.
The state maintains that the project utilises surplus floodwaters – not allocated waters – and aligns with national priorities for inter-basin water transfers to mitigate regional water shortages.
At the same time, Andhra Pradesh’s Irrigation Minister Nimmala Rama Naidu, addressing a media conference in Amaravati on Tuesday, 17 June, asserted that the project would not harm the interests of upper riparian states of the Godavari.
“We intend to utilise only the flood waters at Polavaram that would otherwise go to waste in the Bay of Bengal. We are not tapping assured waters, as there is no way we can use the waters allocated to the upper riparian states,” he said, adding that every year, 3,000 TMCFT of water flows into the sea unutilised.
The Centre’s response has so far been cautious. In a letter dated 28 May 2025, Union Jal Shakti Minister CR Patil assured Telangana that the CWC would examine the G-B Link proposal strictly in line with tribunal awards, inter-state agreements, existing guidelines, and provisions of the APRA 2014.
However, Telangana has perceived the request for a DPR as a sign of tacit approval, further fuelling its objections.
As the CWC reviews the PFR and Andhra Pradesh prepares its DPR, the dispute appears set to intensify. Telangana has demanded that the CWC reject the PFR and that the GRMB, KRMB, and Apex Council enforce APRA 2014 provisions.
The outcome will likely test the Centre’s ability to balance the competing water rights of the two states.
(Edited by Dese Gowda)
