The tender issued for preparing the Detailed Project Report of the Polavaram–Banakacherla Link Project has been cancelled in Andhra Pradesh, after objections were raised by Telangana about the project’s legal and environmental status. With an estimated cost of nearly ₹81,900 crore, the proposal aimed at transferring surplus Godavari waters to the Krishna basin to improve irrigation and drinking water availability in several regions. However, concerns related to environmental clearances, tribunal norms and inter-state water sharing prompted the withdrawal of the tender until further clarity is achieved.
Purpose of the Polavaram–Banakacherla Link
The Polavaram–Banakacherla link was conceptualised as a major water-transfer corridor intended to support districts facing severe rainfall fluctuations and groundwater scarcity. Many regions in the State have remained dependent on borewells and seasonal storage, creating uncertainty in agriculture and drinking supply during dry months. The plan to utilise surplus Godavari water was seen as a long-term solution to stabilise farming, support industrial expansion and meet domestic water needs in rapidly growing areas.
By creating a channel between the two basins, the project was expected to improve productivity, reduce water stress and bring measurable benefits to lakhs of households. Hydrological experts have often pointed out that inter-basin transfer can transform rural economies, but such projects need precise planning and a strong legal foundation to move forward.
Objections Raised by Telangana
The cancellation of the DPR tender followed a formal objection from Telangana, which challenged the move on environmental and legal grounds. Telangana stated that a major river-linking proposal cannot proceed without mandatory environmental permissions and a detailed impact assessment. Without these approvals, any construction or planning could face suspension later, affecting public funds and development timelines.
In addition to environmental concerns, Telangana pointed to rules set by river tribunals and national water authorities. As surplus water calculations determine whether inter-basin diversion is permitted, Telangana sought clarity from higher authorities before any DPR work could begin. The objection also acknowledged that water sharing remains a sensitive matter between both States since their bifurcation, making it important that no step is carried out without mutual agreement.
Reason Behind Cancelling the Tender
Instead of pushing forward and risking legal disputes, the tender was withdrawn to ensure that the project remains within all required technical and regulatory boundaries. The cancellation allows the proposal to return for review at a later stage, once every statutory requirement has been addressed. While the decision pauses progress temporarily, experts believe it prevents prolonged conflict and ensures that planning remains legally sustainable.
The withdrawal does not indicate abandonment of the proposal. Andhra Pradesh is expected to revisit the project after obtaining environmental permissions, water availability confirmation and central-level scrutiny. A revised DPR tender can be issued only after these fundamental requirements are completed.
Impact on Water Planning
The tender cancellation has drawn attention to the broader challenge of water security. Many parts of Andhra Pradesh still rely heavily on monsoon cycles, leading to inconsistent agricultural output and pressure on groundwater. A stable supply of river water could significantly improve cultivation, protect rural incomes and reduce vulnerability during drought seasons. However, water infrastructure projects of this scale demand precision, approvals and scientific validation.
Past experiences across India show that major river-linking efforts have faced setbacks when environmental permissions were ignored or when inter-state disputes intensified. By stepping back at the DPR stage, Andhra Pradesh has avoided a situation where work begins but is later halted due to technical objections or court interventions. This approach ensures that planning remains future-proof, financially protected and legally compliant.
Future Course of Action
The future path of the Polavaram–Banakacherla Link Project now depends on updated hydrological studies, environmental reports and stakeholder consultations. Experts believe that once permissions are secured, the tender can be reissued in a stronger and more defensible form. Consultations with Telangana are expected to play a crucial role, as any project involving shared rivers requires coordination and acceptance between neighbouring States.
Authorities are likely to seek clarity from national water bodies on surplus water calculations before restarting technical work. Only after legal, environmental and inter-state requirements are settled can the DPR move towards the next stage. This step-by-step approach ensures that resources are not wasted and that long-term goals remain achievable.
Broader Context of River-Linking Projects
Across the country, river-linking projects have generated interest as potential solutions to droughts, floods and uneven water distribution. Some projects have delivered major benefits, while others have faced long delays due to environmental sensitivity, financial hurdles or conflicts between States. The Polavaram–Banakacherla proposal remains part of this larger national conversation. It holds strategic value, but success depends on transparent execution rooted in scientific and legal approv
The cancellation of the DPR tender marks an important turning point in the Polavaram–Banakacherla Link Project. Andhra Pradesh has paused the process to avoid controversy and to ensure that the proposal stands up to environmental rules, tribunal norms and inter-state cooperation. While the project remains a significant water-management opportunity, its future will depend on rigorous evaluation and clearances. By prioritising compliance over rushed execution, Andhra Pradesh aims to build a foundation that can support long-term water security and development without legal interruptions. The decision reflects a cautious and responsible approach to an infrastructure proposal that carries both opportunity and complexity.
