Polavaram Project: A Development Dream or a Federal Disaster?

Spread love

As Andhra Pradesh pushes ahead with its mega-dam, Odisha and Chhattisgarh warn of tribal displacement, ecological loss, and a constitutional crisis

By Pradeep Kumar Panda

Bhubaneswar, August 21, 2025 — The Polavaram Project on the Godavari River has been hailed as a transformative “national project” by the Centre. Yet, beneath the rhetoric of irrigation potential and hydroelectric promise lies a tangled story of displacement, ecological destruction, and simmering interstate tensions that threaten India’s federal spirit.

As work accelerates on this long-delayed dam, Odisha and Chhattisgarh warn of catastrophic consequences—land submergence, tribal displacement, and irreversible ecological loss. Despite repeated interventions by the Supreme Court and mounting protests from local communities, the Centre has sanctioned nearly ₹18,000 crore for the project’s completion without addressing these concerns.

What was conceived as a multipurpose irrigation boon is now at risk of becoming a graveyard of human rights and federal principles.

The Promise of Polavaram

Conceived over six decades ago, the Polavaram Project was envisioned as a multi-purpose irrigation and hydroelectric powerhouse on the Godavari. Located in Andhra Pradesh’s Eluru and East Godavari districts, the dam would not only irrigate parched regions but also generate electricity, support navigation through National Waterway 4, and control floods downstream.

Its backwaters, however, tell a different story. Spread over 150 km along the Godavari and 115 km along the Sabari River, the reservoir’s reach spills far beyond Andhra Pradesh. Odisha, Chhattisgarh, and even parts of Telangana are directly affected.

The displacement numbers are staggering: 276 villages, 44,574 families, and over 50% of them tribals. The submergence threatens archaeological treasures, wildlife habitats in Papikonda National Park, coal reserves, temples, and even 10,000-year-old megalithic burial sites. Human rights activists like Medha Patkar have rightly asked: At what cost are we chasing this dream of progress?

Politics, Clearances, and Compromises

After decades of delay, Andhra Pradesh finally secured environmental clearance in 2005—on the back of a ₹4,500 crore forest management plan and promises of “generous” rehabilitation. Yet, the project soon became a political football. Excavation began in 2006 but stalled repeatedly for want of forest and environment approvals.

Odisha and Chhattisgarh quickly entered the fray, alleging that their lands and tribal communities would be submerged without consent or compensation. Both states approached the Supreme Court, arguing that the Centre had overstepped by pushing the project under the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014, without securing mandatory approvals. Public hearings in affected districts were never held.

Despite this, successive central governments—cutting across party lines—have pushed the project as a national priority, often brushing aside federal and environmental objections.

Odisha’s Stand: An Existential Crisis

For Odisha, Polavaram is not just another interstate dispute—it is a matter of survival. Over 30% of Malkangiri district, including Motu and Podia blocks, faces submergence. Tribal groups like the Bonda, Kandha, Koya, and Gadaba—classified as Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PVTGs)—stand to lose their homes, lands, and cultural roots.

IIT Roorkee studies warn that backwater levels could rise as high as 232.2 meters, with flood flows reaching 58 lakh cusecs—far higher than initially approved. This means even greater submergence than feared. Yet, neither comprehensive rehabilitation plans nor fresh environmental clearances have been secured for Odisha’s affected districts.

The ruling Biju Janata Dal (BJD) has mounted a campaign—through courts, Parliament, and public protests—to halt construction until Odisha’s concerns are addressed. From Supreme Court petitions to sit-ins at Motu, the party has consistently accused the BJP-led Centre of riding roughshod over constitutional federalism.

The Federal Faultline

The Polavaram saga is no longer just about one dam—it has become a litmus test for cooperative federalism in India. The unilateral revision of design flood discharge (from 36 lakh to 50 lakh cusecs), without stakeholder consultation, epitomizes the Centre’s top-down approach.

In August 2025, a high-level BJD delegation met Union Jal Shakti Minister C.R. Patil and Central Water Commission (CWC) officials. Their demands were straightforward:

Stop-work orders until fresh backwater studies are conducted.
Independent assessments by neutral agencies like CWPRS Pune.
Comprehensive R&R plans in consultation with Odisha.
A Chief Ministers’ conclave of all affected states.
Transparency in technical modifications, including the controversial Polavaram–Banakacherla Link Project.

So far, the Centre has offered little more than platitudes while releasing thousands of crores for project completion.

Environmental and Human Rights Costs

Beyond federal politics lies a deeper question: What does India prioritize—development or justice? Polavaram will destroy forests, farmland, and heritage sites while uprooting some of the country’s most marginalized communities.

The project symbolizes a pattern: infrastructure being pursued as a symbol of national progress, while the displaced—often tribal, rural, and voiceless—are left to fend for themselves. Rehabilitation is either underfunded or delayed, ecological studies are perfunctory, and interstate consultation is tokenistic.

This is not just about Odisha’s Malkangiri district. It is about the soul of India’s development model. Can a democracy afford to trample its most vulnerable in the name of nation-building?

Not a Zero-Sum Game

The Polavaram dispute need not be a zero-sum battle. A cooperative, consultative approach can unlock win-win solutions:

Joint Hydropower Projects: Relocating planned dams (like the Konta/Motu project) downstream to Andhra territory could reduce backwater submergence and share benefits across states.
Smaller Barrage Systems: Series of medium barrages along the Sabari could generate electricity while minimizing displacement.
Upstream Flood Management: Harnessing tributaries like Indravati and Pranahita in Odisha and Chhattisgarh would reduce extreme flood flows downstream.
Transparent R&R Framework: Compensation and rehabilitation must not only meet legal norms but also uphold human dignity, especially for tribal groups.

Federalism on Trial

The Polavaram Project encapsulates the dilemmas of India’s development journey: ambition versus equity, growth versus sustainability, centralization versus federalism. Andhra Pradesh seeks irrigation and power; Odisha and Chhattisgarh fear existential loss; the Centre pushes ahead, citing national interest.

But if “national interest” ignores constitutional federalism, environmental safeguards, and human rights, it ceases to be national. It becomes majoritarian.

The Supreme Court’s eventual verdict may settle the technicalities. But the moral question remains: Will India’s development path be one of consultation and justice, or one of imposition and displacement?

For the tribal families of Malkangiri, this is not an academic debate—it is a question of survival. For India, it is a test of its democratic promise.

(This is an opinion piece, and views expressed are those of the author only)

Follow The Raisina Hills on WhatsApp, Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, and LinkedIn