Ghose Committee says barrages meant only to divert water, should be constructed with low storage capacity
The PC Ghose Commission’s report asserts that barrages should only divert water and recommends low storage capacities. It questioned the high storage of Medigadda and highlighted issues related to its design
Hyderabad: The PC Ghose Commission’s report maintained that barrages were meant only for diverting water and should be constructed with low storage capacity. It also pointed out that the Medigadda barrage was constructed with high storage capacity, which was against the general design practice.
This observation, however, is under question. There are many barrages that were constructed with over 10 tmc ft of storage capacity in the country. In fact, the Congress government had planned the Jurala barrage with 11 tmcft storage capacity. However, due to the failure to complete land acquisition and inter-State disputes, at present, only 9 tmcft was being filled up in the barrage.
Also Read
- PC Ghose Commission’s report on anticipated lines; blames KCR
- BRS sees political motives in Congress govt’s SIT, selective use of Justice Ghose report
- Questions mount over truncated Kaleshwaram Commission report
- Ghose Committee says barrages meant only to divert water, should be constructed with low storage capacity
- Ghose Committee’s allegations of financial irregularity under scanner – Part 1
- Kaleshwaram row: Ghose report blames KCR, Harish Rao; facts highlight leadership, delivery – Part 2
- Kaleshwaram report raises questions, critics respond with facts
- No honesty in claiming no provision of water at Tummadihatti
This apart, when there is scope for diversion of water through gravity, barrages are built with low storage capacity. In Telangana’s context, water has to be lifted and to ensure this, the prescribed water level has to be maintained. This makes storage of water mandatory.
The State government had shared the water storage capacity and other details of Medigadda, Annaram and Sundilla barrages to the Central Water Commission (CWC) in the Kaleshwaram Detailed Project Report, besides the designs. The CWC accorded permission after duly considering all these factors. There were no questions raised over the water storage capacity of the three barrages by the CWC.
The main idea behind constructing the barrages was to ensure the rejuvenation of the dried-up River Godavari. Storage of water was necessitated for this very purpose.
Furthermore, the Commission’s report maintained that the barrage had sunk due to a permeable foundation. Okla, Vazirabad, Farakka, Kota, Durgapur and other barrages were constructed with the same permeable foundation concept. There were no issues or problems reported at the structures. At Medigadda, cracks occurred in only one block and not the entire barrage. In fact, in the current season, water was released downstream from the barrage, and there were no issues.
