Kaleshwaram Project Designs Forced Approval

Introduction

In recent revelations before the Justice Ghose Commission  of Inquiry, retired Chief Engineer of the Telangana Irrigation Department, A Narender Reddy, disclosed startling details about the Kaleshwaram Lift Irrigation Scheme (KLIS) and the Medigadda barrage sinking incident. The inquiry, which aims to investigate the causes of the Medigadda barrage collapse, has uncovered that Reddy faced significant pressure from higher authorities to hastily approve designs and   drawings for the project, which later led to critical failures.

Pressure from Top Leadership

Narender Reddy revealed that he was subjected to intense pressure from former Telangana Chief Minister K Chandrasekhar Rao (KCR), former Irrigation Minister T Harish Rao, and other senior officials to approve the designs for the construction of the Kaleshwaram barrages. Despite his reservations, he was compelled to give his consent due to the demands from these powerful figures. Reddy’s testimony sheds light on the behind-the-scenes actions that contributed to the hasty approval of the project’s designs.

Changes in Designs After Submission

According to Reddy, the designs for the Kaleshwaram project were initially prepared based on the specified locations for the barrages and were subsequently submitted to the Central Water Commission (CWC) for approval. However, he disclosed that even after the designs were sent to the CWC, significant changes were made. This modification of approved designs raises concerns about the project’s integrity and the decision-making process that allowed such alterations.

Opportunity to Rectify Mistakes Missed

Reddy further mentioned that the Telangana government had an opportunity to rectify the mistakes after the sinking of the Medigadda barrage. Despite the gravity of the situation, the then-state government failed to take timely action to address the issues. This negligence, according to Reddy, was a critical factor that contributed to the eventual collapse of the barrage, a failure that could have been prevented with proper intervention.

Negligence During Construction

The retired chief engineer also highlighted the role of Larsen & Toubro (L&T), the contractor for the Kaleshwaram project, in the design discussions. Reddy alleged that L&T held regular consultations with the Chief Design Officer (CDO) throughout the project. However, despite these discussions, significant negligence was exhibited by officials during the construction phase, leading to what Reddy described as “certain blunders.” These errors, compounded by the pressure to approve the designs quickly, resulted in suboptimal construction quality.

Compromised Quality Control

One of the most alarming aspects of Reddy’s testimony was his claim that the quality control measures for the Kaleshwaram project were compromised due to the pressure from higher authorities. The importance of stringent quality control in such a massive infrastructure project cannot be overstated, and Reddy’s disclosure points to systemic failures that likely contributed to the project’s flaws. The lack of proper quality control is a serious issue that calls into question the safety and durability of the entire Kaleshwaram Lift Irrigation Scheme.

Inadequate Operation and Maintenance

Reddy also criticized the operation and maintenance practices followed after the construction of the barrages. He claimed that the barrages, particularly the Medigadda barrage, were not maintained correctly, leading to their eventual sinking. Proper maintenance is crucial for the longevity and safety of such structures, and the failure to adhere to standard practices has now resulted in severe consequences for the project.

Conclusion

The testimony of retired Chief Engineer A Narender Reddy before the Justice Ghose Commission has brought to light several critical issues surrounding the Kaleshwaram Lift Irrigation Scheme and the Medigadda barrage sinking incident. The pressure from top leadership, changes in designs post-submission, negligence during construction, compromised quality control, and inadequate operation and maintenance have all contributed to the failures of the project. These revelations underscore the need for a thorough investigation and accountability to prevent such incidents in future projects.

Disclaimer: The information presented in this article is based on the testimony of retired Chief Engineer A Narender Reddy before the Justice Ghose Commission. The opinions expressed are those of the source and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publication.

Harish Faces Complaint Over Temple Controversy

Most Frequently Asked Questions