Minister MB Patil dismisses Maharashtra govt claims on Almatti dam

BENGALURU: Industries Minister M B Patil on Friday dismissed Maharashtra’s claim that raising the height of the Alamatti dam to 524.256 metres would cause floods in Sangli and Kolhapur districts. He asserted that this argument has already been rejected by the Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal, the Supreme Court, and even in the Lok Sabha.

“Sangli and surrounding regions in Maharashtra witnessed severe floods in 1964, 1976, 1994 and 1997 — all before the construction of the Alamatti dam. Moreover, as early as the year 2000, the Supreme Court had ruled that Karnataka is entitled to raise the height of the dam to 524.256 metres”. Patil explained.

He further pointed out that Maharashtra had raised the matter again in 2005 before the Krishna Water Tribunal, which also rejected the claim. “The Tribunal, in its detailed reports of 2010 and 2013, clearly stated that the Alamatti dam was not responsible for floods in Sangli and Kolhapur. It even considered the impact of the Hipparagi dam in this context, but found no basis for Maharashtra’s claim. No state has challenged the verdict of the second Krishna Water Disputes Tribunal constituted to examine such matters,” he said.

“Even the erstwhile unified Andhra Pradesh had once opposed the raising of Alamatti’s height, claiming it would affect its share of water. That, too, was dismissed,” Patil noted. “Maharashtra’s current objection is politically motivated. Having served as Water Resources Minister for five years, I have complete clarity on the issue,” he said.

Patil added that rampant encroachment on catchment areas in Sangli district was a more credible reason for flooding and that he possessed a report on the matter. He urged the Maharashtra government to focus on resolving such issues rather than obstructing Karnataka’s development initiatives.

He also stated that he would hand over all relevant documents to the current Water Resources Minister, D K Shivakumar. “Our state will give a befitting reply to Maharashtra’s objections,” he asserted. (ANI)