Karnataka seeks larger water share in river linking projects | Bengaluru News

karnataka seeks larger water share in river linking projects
Share the Reality


Karnataka seeks larger water share in river linking projects

Bengaluru: Deputy chief minister and water resources minister DK Shivakumar Wednesday said Karnataka has urged the Centre to increase the state’s water allocation under the river linking projects, arguing that the quantity proposed by the National Water Development Authority (NWDA) is inadequate.Addressing a press conference at Karnataka Bhavan in New Delhi after the 24th meeting of the NWDA, Shivakumar said, “We have appealed for 40-45 tmcft of water for the state in the river linking project. We have also appealed to the Centre to release an additional 5 tmcft of water to Bhima river basin.”He said the meeting, chaired by the Union Jal Shakti minister CR Patil, discussed the Godavari-Cauvery and Bedthi-Varada river linking projects. “In the first phase of the Godavari-Cauvery linking project which has a capacity of 148 tmcft, Karnataka has been allocated only 15.9 tmcft. We have asked for details on the coverage and use of this water,” he said.Shivakumar said Karnataka has been allotted 18.5 tmcft under the Bedthi-Varada river linking project, taking the total allocation to 34.4 tmcft. “We have given a go ahead for a DPR for Bedthi-Varada river linking,” he said.He added that the project is estimated to cost Rs 10,000 crore, with the Centre bearing 90% of it and the state the remaining 10%.On other irrigation projects, Shivakumar said, “In view of the Supreme Court ruling, we have informed the Jal Shakthi minister that we would submit all documents in two months.”He said the state demanded the release of promised funds and a gazette notification for the Upper Krishna project, sought intervention of the union environment ministry in the Mahadayi project, and discussed Mekedatu and Upper Bhadra projects and Jal Jeevan Mission. “The Jal Shakti minister has promised to give me time on another day to discuss all projects,” he said.Metro, RRTS proposals taken upShivakumar said he met union urban development minister Manohar Lal Khattar to press for approvals and fund release for Bengaluru’s Metro projects. “We have also requested approval for a new cost estimate for Metro phase 2. The DPR for phase 2 was prepared 15 years ago and the cost was estimated at Rs 26,000 crore. Now it has escalated to Rs 40,000 crore,” he said.On Phase 3A of Namma Metro, he said, “We had submitted a proposal for approval for the Phase 3 (A) of Metro from Sarjapur to Hebbal. I have told the minister that we can start the work if approvals are given.” He said a third-party agency, Systra, reviewed the project and recommended dropping two stations from the 28-station corridor, a proposal the state has accepted.Shivakumar said a request has also been made to prepare DPRs for the regional rapid transit system (RRTS) corridors, connecting Bengaluru with places such as Bidadi, Mysuru, Kanakapura, Nelamangala, Tumakuru, Chikkaballapur, Hoskote and Kolar. He said these projects would help ease congestion in Bengaluru and promote development in the surrounding regions.Shivakumar said the Centre has promised to consider the RRTS proposal. He said he had conveyed to Union ministers that Bengaluru is emerging as a global city and that denying support to its growth would amount to injustice. “The Union minister has promised to look into this appeal,” he added.BoxCentre has no role in tunnel road: DCMDCM DK Shivakumar clarified that the proposed tunnel road project in Bengaluru is entirely a state govt initiative and does not involve the Centre. Responding to questions on whether the issue was discussed with Union ministers, he said, “The Centre has nothing to do with it as it is a state govt project. This project is on a build-operate-transfer model and hence the bidder has to make the investment.”The clarification came in response to queries on the role of large private infrastructure players, including the Adani Group, in the project. He said he was not aware of who had submitted bids for the project.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *