Krishna Water Dispute: Will Telangana’s Argument Win the Tribunal’s Favor?

In a crucial hearing at the Brijesh Kumar Tribunal, senior advocate CS Vaidyanathan, representing the Telangana government, presented arguments defending the state’s share of Krishna River waters. Vaidyanathan emphasized that even with an allocation of 555 TMC (thousand million cubic feet) of water to Telangana, there would be no adverse impact on Andhra Pradesh (AP). The tribunal, which is deliberating on the distribution of Krishna waters between the two states, is scheduled to reconvene on April 15.

Vaidyanathan Explains Water Utilization and Diversion in AP

During the third day of hearings, Vaidyanathan addressed key concerns regarding water usage and diversion by AP. He informed the tribunal that AP is utilizing 512 TMC of water, of which 323 TMC is diverted to other basins outside the Krishna River basin. Only 189 TMC is being used within the Krishna basin. This statement was made in response to the tribunal’s chairman, Justice Brijesh Kumar, who had asked about the amount of water being diverted from the Krishna basin to areas outside of it.

Vaidyanathan also explained that AP has access to significant water resources from other sources, including the Godavari river. He stated that 43.2 TMC of Godavari water flows into the Krishna delta in AP, with an additional 80 TMC being diverted through the Polavaram project. Furthermore, the Pattiseema lift irrigation project, constructed by AP, has been diverting 100 TMC of water to the Krishna delta since 2015.

Water Scarcity in the Krishna Basin and Telangana’s Allocation Concerns

Vaidyanathan also highlighted the severe water scarcity in the Krishna basin in the 2023-24 period. He explained that only 145 TMC of water flowed into the Srisailam project during that time, of which AP utilized approximately 125 TMC. Of this, 40 TMC was diverted through the Pattiseema lift irrigation project. Vaidyanathan urged the tribunal to consider the additional water sources available for AP’s projects and allocate saved water to Telangana’s projects in the Krishna basin.

Also Read: Kaleshwaram Project Under Fire: Can Telangana Government Defend Its Record?

Srisailam and Water Allocation to Telangana

The issue of water allocation to Telangana’s projects was a key point of contention. Vaidyanathan informed the tribunal about the Srisailam Left Bank Canal (SLBC) and the Srisailam Right Bank Canal (SRBC), both of which were proposed to provide 150 TMC of water through gravity to districts like Nalgonda, Warangal, and Khammam. He pointed out that during the united state era, the state had not pressed for the allocation of water for these canals in the first Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal (KWDT-1) and that priority was given to diverting water to projects outside the Krishna basin.

The Telugu Ganga Project and Other Diverted Water Sources

Vaidyanathan also mentioned the Telugu Ganga project, which is designed to divert water outside the Krishna basin. He stated that the joint state (before Telangana’s formation) had put significant pressure on the KWDT-2 to allocate water to the Telugu Ganga project. This, he argued, led to less water being allocated for projects in the Krishna basin that would directly benefit Telangana.

Tribunal Hearing Adjourned to April 15-17

After three days of detailed hearings, the Brijesh Kumar Tribunal adjourned the proceedings, deferring the next set of hearings to April 15-17. The tribunal will continue to hear the final arguments on behalf of the Telangana government and other parties involved in the Krishna water dispute. This prolonged legal battle aims to resolve the complex issue of water distribution between Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, which has been a point of contention since the bifurcation of the states in 2014.

Awaiting Final Verdict on Krishna Water Distribution

The ongoing hearings at the Brijesh Kumar Tribunal have shed light on the differing claims of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh over the sharing of Krishna River water. With the next round of hearings scheduled for mid-April, all eyes are on the tribunal’s final decision, which could have significant implications for both states, particularly in terms of water resources for agriculture, irrigation, and drinking purposes.