Hidden Water Politics Behind Banakacharla Link Raises Concerns for Telangana

Dark Deals in the Name of Water: Banakacharla Link Raises Suspicion

There is a famous saying that even God cannot catch the thief who lives inside the house. It may sound harsh, but it reflects a painful truth. When an outsider tries to deceive us, we recognize it. But when someone from within betrays us, the damage remains hidden until it becomes irreversible. Telangana is now experiencing a similar situation. The same group that once made the state believe in false water calculations for six decades has again returned to push the region towards injustice. This time, the plan involves Delhi’s involvement and a silent political agreement that threatens Telangana’s water future. What is shocking is that even after knowing about these developments, the Congress government continues to mislead the people, pretending to be unaware while the state stands on the edge of a dangerous situation.

Banakacharla or Nallamala Sagar – A Distracting Name Game?

The issue that was earlier called Banakacharla is now being presented as Nallamala Sagar. This is not a simple name change but an attempt to divert Telangana’s attention. The Congress government, along with Modi and Chandrababu, seems to be playing a script designed to confuse the public. Former Minister Harish Rao exposed the matter, revealing that the approval process of Banakacharla is moving forward only on the basis of ten years of Godavari inflow data given by the Andhra Pradesh government. This is alarming because if this becomes the reference point, Telangana may face huge obstacles in getting permissions for its own water projects in the future. Even the Central Water Commission has warned that if Andhra Pradesh’s false calculations are accepted, upper states like Telangana could lose their rightful share.

Threat to Telangana’s Water Rights

If the Banakacharla link gets permission in the current format, it could become a permanent threat to Telangana’s water projects. Despite receiving the preliminary report months ago, the Telangana government did not raise objections. Why was there no challenge? What steps did Chief Minister Revanth Reddy take after returning from Delhi? When Telangana itself has filed a Supreme Court case against water diversion, why did the same government send names to the committee formed by the Center? Andhra Pradesh proposed their committee members on December 15, and just a week later, Telangana sent names on December 23. If the project was already “halted,” as the government claimed, why were committee names sent at all?

Silent Agreements or Hidden Pressure?

Earlier, 45 TMCs were cut from the Palamuru-Rangareddy project, and Telangana accepted only 45 TMCs as sufficient. Now, Andhra Pradesh is moving ahead to divert 200 TMCs from Godavari while the Telangana government remains silent. If this continues, what does the combination of Modi, Chandrababu, and Revanth really plan for Telangana? The claim that the Telangana government successfully stopped Andhra Pradesh’s attempt has now been proven false. Their statements are turning out to be nothing more than a deceptive cover to calm the public.

A Trail of Water Injustice Continues

Advertisement

Harish Rao’s recent revelations show that the Central Water Commission’s preliminary report confirms that the process has never stopped. This reveals the possibility that the Telangana government may have been aware of everything and still chose silence. If permissions are granted based only on ten years of data, the injustice becomes clear. When decades of stored data is available, why was only Andhra Pradesh’s short-term data used? Experts strongly argue that this is an intentional strategy designed to benefit Andhra Pradesh and create trouble for Telangana in the future.

Future Danger for All Upper States

If Banakacharla is approved, Telangana, Maharashtra, and Karnataka may face serious blocks in obtaining project approvals. Even more concerning is that the projects which do not have clearance, like Uttara Andhra Sujala Sravanti and Chintalapudi Lift Scheme, are being unofficially recognized in records. This gives Andhra Pradesh indirect rights that contradict tribunal orders. The Davaleshwaram Barrage, which utilizes 250-300 TMC every year, is completely ignored. If these values are marked as Andhra Pradesh’s protected usage, Telangana’s future projects will be forced to adjust within the remaining inflow, which could make future permissions impossible.

Why Was Telangana Silent for Five Months?

The government proudly claimed that Banakacharla was stopped. But if that was true, why was no objection filed after the preliminary report in July? The government behaved like a silent spectator. Even though the report was public, no explanation was given. If Telangana truly wanted to protect its water rights, the government should have immediately questioned why data from only ten years was used, why upper states’ rights were not considered, and why future allocations were being jeopardized.

Supreme Court Case: Genuine Action or Image Management?

Although the government filed a case in the Supreme Court on December 4, critics say it was only to manage public anger before sending committee names. If a legal case was filed due to distrust, why send committee names afterward? This dual approach raises suspicion that decisions were already agreed upon behind closed doors. The biggest doubt emerging is whether the case is real resistance or simply a tool to maintain public trust while allowing administrative processes to continue.

The Banakacharla issue is not a small administrative file. It is a turning point that can change Telangana’s water future. If permissions move forward silently, Telangana may face a historic injustice that cannot be reversed. The people deserve answers, not silence. The government must respond, object transparently, and act decisively to protect the state’s water rights before it is too late.