Hyderabad: Telangana high court on Wednesday issued notices to the central govt and the National Dam Safety Authority (NDSA) and sought their responses in a petition filed seeking an independent technical inspection of Medigadda, Annaram and Sundilla barrages, alongside the Kannepally and Sundilla pump houses, which are a part of the Kaleswaram lift irrigation project.The petitioner, advocate Srirambhatla Sharath Kumar, alleged that due to the inaction of the state govt in initiating any corrective steps as suggested by the NDSA, water was going waste downstream and farmers and agricultural activity were severely affected.The petitioner also sought that the assessment be conducted to determine if any part of the project could be safely put back into limited use and then submit a reasoned technical report.Justice B Vijaysen Reddy, who heard the matter, also issued notices to the state govt and the Telangana Retired Engineers Association (TREA). “Since it’s a technical and sensitive matter, let NDSA appear and tell their stand,” the judge said, posting the case to July 21 for further hearing.The petitioner’s counsel argued that the issue was being politicised without even looking into the feasibility options.“With a clear political vendetta, the state has not taken up any steps to repair the damages. They are trying to build a narrative that the project is a total waste of public money and the project is an engineering disaster,” the counsel said.After the alleged damage to the piers was noticed in Oct 2023, NDSA inspected the site and submitted a preliminary report to the state govt suggesting corrective measures, but the govt does not seem to be interested in taking up any measures.“Moreover, as time passes, flow in the barrages has decreased, resulting in damage. We are not seeking any action against the state or authorities. We only want the NDSA report, which was submitted after inspecting the damaged piers to be implemented in the larger interest of the project and farmers in the state,” the counsel added.Taking note of the arguments, the judge asked what was the loss caused to the state due to the damage to the dam, and if there was any decrease in the storage capacities. “That aspect is not yet assessed,” the petitioner’s counsel responded.
