Hyderabad: Quoting from the National Dam Safety Authority (NDSA) report on structural damage to the Medigadda, Annaram, and Sundilla barrages—constructed as part of the Kaleshwaram Lift Irrigation Scheme (KLIS), Telangana irrigation minister N Uttam Kumar Reddy delivered a detailed presentation on Tuesday, 29 April, in Hyderabad.
Calling out the previous Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) government’s false claims regarding the unavailability of water at Tummidihatti, the originally proposed site for the project, Reddy said a five-member committee of retired engineers had recommended against shifting the project to Medigadda. However, the then BRS government not only ignored the recommendations but also suppressed the report, which is now accessible under the Congress government.
Citing the NDSA report, Reddy said the Annaram and Sundilla barrages were constructed 2.2 km and 5.4 km away from their originally designed locations—positions below the riverbed level, which he described as highly uncommon. This, the NDSA expert committee stated, had led to massive sand sedimentation upstream of the Annaram barrage.
“No investigations were conducted at the new sites of the Annaram and Sundilla barrages. They altered the fundamental parameters of the barrage foundations. Worse still, the borehole investigations carried out earlier became useless due to the shifting of locations during construction,” Reddy stated.
He noted that construction began before the Detailed Project Report (DPR) was submitted to the Central Water Commission (CWC), with the DPR filed six months after construction commenced. Reddy claimed the DPR was hastily prepared to justify doubling the project cost.
Even after submission, the project underwent significant changes during execution, with construction not aligned with the DPR. The work was taken up despite the DPR still awaiting CWC approval. The NDSA report pointed out serious deviations in project parameters, Reddy said, adding that no geotechnical investigations were conducted at Annaram and Sundilla, and the design flood value for Sundilla was not properly considered.
“If this had happened in any other country, would they have stayed silent?” he asked.
Reddy said that the Central Design Organisation (CDO), which normally drives an irrigation project from planning to maintenance, was sidelined during the Kaleshwaram Project due to constant intervention by top-level officials.
“Periodic inspection reports weren’t placed before the CDO. Consequently, the barrages, initially designed as floating structures, were built as rigid structures,” he cited from the NDSA report.
Reddy further pointed out that the Telangana State Engineering Research Laboratories had clearly recommended that the project could not be operated continuously as per regulatory requirements, but the Project Construction Units (PCUs) ignored these recommendations, leading to structural distress.
“Even gate operation guidelines were disregarded. After the inauguration, debris and the cofferdam were not removed from the Medigadda barrage, obstructing water flow,” he added.
The NDSA report highlighted that signs of distress appeared immediately after the 2019 inauguration. Water was seen oozing out from the downstream areas of the concrete blocks and the cut-off wall.
“Yet the impounded water wasn’t drained, and the reservoir continued to be used. When the NDSA questioned the PCUs, they responded that they lacked government permission,” Reddy said.
He noted that poor maintenance protocols led to deterioration. Despite being aware of the sand-piping phenomenon and other issues, agencies failed to act. No maintenance was carried out at Annaram and Sundilla.
The NDSA found that neither pre-monsoon nor post-monsoon inspections were carried out, and no maintenance records were available—violations of the Dam Safety Act.
“Even in the first year, there were serious maintenance delays. No operation manuals were prepared. There was no quality control either,” Reddy stated.
He said the NDSA report recommended a comprehensive rehabilitation design, geotechnical studies, and hydraulic model studies as a path forward.
“Anyone with even a shred of shame wouldn’t talk like that,” Reddy responded to BRS leaders questioning the NDSA’s authority.
He reminded that the NDSA is a constitutional body formed by an Act of Parliament, passed when BRS was in power, and supported it. The committee, comprising top experts, took 12–13 months, held hundreds of meetings, and conducted investigations through over 100 government agencies.
He noted that the project collapsed while BRS was in power, and the NDSA’s team visited and submitted its findings during that period. “The observations of the initial, interim, and final reports were consistent,” he emphasised.
To highlight the impact on Telangana’s reputation, Reddy said that when the state sought approval from the Union Ministry of Jal Shakti for the Sitarama Sagar barrage, secretary Mukherjee refused, citing the collapse of the Kaleshwaram Project designed by the irrigation department.
“We then had to send the proposal to the CWC for technical clearance and allocation of 67 TMC of water,” he added.
Debunking BRS claims about the project’s contribution to irrigation, Reddy said that despite Medigadda, Annaram, and Sundilla barrages becoming defunct, Telangana produced record paddy yields—1.53 lakh tonnes in Kharif 2024 and 1.27 lakh tonnes in Rabi 2024–25.
Asked about action against those accountable, Reddy said that the Justice PC Ghose Committee of Inquiry was actively working and had been handed the NDSA report.
“Action will be taken not just against the officials who committed wrongdoing but also those who ordered them. From what we know, KCR was the irrigation minister and chief minister when the project’s problems began,” he said, assuring that the law would take its course.
On whether the project might be shifted back to Tummidihatti, Reddy said that any decision would be made in the best interest of the state, based on the NDSA expert committee’s advice and cabinet discussions.
