Skip to main content

Narmada waters from dam meant for irrigating parched fields; power 'last priority'

By Rajiv Shah

With the Narmada Control Authority (NCA), the powerful inter-state body working under the Government of India, having unanimously decided to raise the Narmada dam to the full reservoir level (FRL), 138.68 metres from 121.92 metres, a new apprehension is starting to grip the top Gujarat officialdom. Expressing the new fear, a senior official wondered, once the dam reaches its FRL, will the two neighbouring states, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra, allow Gujarat to draw as much water as it wants for irrigation – at the expense of power being produced at the dam? Of would they raise objections, as they are more interested in power than irrigating Gujarat’s parched fields?
A senior Gujarat government official has told Counterview, “Our stand on the issue is very clear. Once the dam reaches the FRL, we would want waters to be flown into the Narmada main canal in full capacity, instead of waters going waste towards downstream through the river-bed power plant of the dam, which should ideally produce 1,200 MW of water from its six Japan-manufactured turbines. We think that there is no reason why so much of water should be allowed to flow down the Narmada river towards the sea, especially because Madhya Pradesh is on verge of fully utilising its share of Narmada water by building several irrigation projects on the river, even as producing a huge amount of power at the Indira Sagar Dam.”
Indeed, the Gujarat government has reason to worry. Only at FRL can 1,450 MW of power be produced to full capacity – 1,200 MW from the river-bed power plant, the rest, 250 MW, from the canal-head power plant. And only at the FRL can the strong force of water would make the turbines rotate to produce full capacity of power, of which Gujarat’s share, under the Narmada Water Disputes Tribunal (NWDT) award, is just 16 per cent, while Madhya Pradesh is to get 57 per cent, and Maharashtra 27 per cent. “Why should Gujarat be interested in power?”, wondered an official.
Officials confirm, till now, Gujarat was not interested in raising the dam only because it knew that by raising the dam height only the two neighbouring states will gain. As for Gujarat, enough water at the current dam height -- 121.98 metres – would be available for irrigation for an incomplete Narmada canal network. However, officials claim, with canal networking on fast track, Gujarat would need “considerably more water from the Narmada dam” than has been hitherto the case. “If water is allowed to flow down the Narmada river through the turbines, we will not get more than half the water necessary for irrigation”, one official conceded.
While Himanshu Thakkar, a well-known environmentalist on dam-related issues, believes that the issue will not arise now as it would take at least three years for the Narmada dam to reach FRL, during which time the Gujarat government will install gates, which is the last step for dam construction, a senior Gujarat official insisted, “We will have to be prepared for opposition from Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra on this issue. Our main aim should be to keep water stored in the reservoir at FRL, which could be used in times of need, instead of allowing all of it to be drained down the river.”
Meanwhile, anti-dam Narmada Bachao Andolan leader Medha Patkar in a statement has sharply criticised Prime Minister Narendra Modi for talking about inclusive growth during his recent speech in Parliament, but actually doing just the opposite in allowing the dam’s height to be raised. “It is absolutely obnoxious that the new government has not given us any hearing, nor has it taken any time, nor made any attempt to know the ground reality, before deciding to go forward with Sardar Sarovar Dam construction to its final height.”
“Sardar Sarovar Dam at its present height itself has 2 lakh people in its affected region, so if the height is raised by installing 17 meters high gates, the densely populated villages in Nimad Madhya Pradesh with houses, farms, shops, temples, mosques, standing crops etc. will face a watery grave”, she has said, adding, “Adivasi villages in the hills in Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat inhabiting hundreds of families are also to be further submerged. Altogether not less than 2.5 lakh people, farmers, fishworkers, potters, shopkeepers will face deluge and devastation, without rehabilitation, if the height is raised from 122 meters to 139 meters!”

Comments

  1. Himanshu UpadhyayaJune 13, 2014

    Every time a decision to raise the height is taken, we are told that it will store more water, hence more water will be available to be utilised for irrigation.
    Please kindly note that the Narmada mail canal originates from 110 metes level. Gujarat could utilise 9 MAF water (what has been granted to it as per NWDTA) even if dam height had not gone beyond this level.
    Recall that book written by Suhas Paranjape and K J Joy titled, Making Sardar Sarovar viable? It was argued that Gujarat can get much more irrigation even with 110 meters high dam if it invests into protective irrigation model. am copying my e mail to both of them.
    Also one might have seen what Himanshu Thakkar wrote on SANDRP blog yesterday.
    To me it appears that the intent is not to spread irrigation and drinking water (that SSNNL offiicial will fail to explain if that was the case, why the canal construction is not yet over and why has Gujarat govt in recent times, de-commanded some parts from irrigation benefit, by letting the govt acquire the land to bring in SIRs and Petro-Chemicals complexes.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes I broadly agree with what Himanshu has said. I do not think that the height of the dam needs to be increased and Gujarat is in a position to take water anywhere int he planned command area with the existing height. So why is that Gujarat pushing for increasing the height?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

NOTE: Hateful, abusive comments won't be published. -- Editor

TRENDING

Gujarat Sachivalaya blacklists, denies entry to woman social activist: Will NHRC probe?

By Kantilal Parmar*  I have approached the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) seeking an independent, impartial, and transparent investigation into a serious incident that took place at the Gujarat Secretariat in Gandhinagar on August 18, 2026. The matter concerns social activist and women’s rights leader Chandrikaben Solanki, who, according to the information available to me, was denied an entry pass to the Secretariat when she went there to meet Gujarat’s Social Justice and Empowerment Minister, Dr. Manishaben Vakil, to raise an issue concerning social justice.

Tibetan activist’s self-immolation sparks fresh concerns over cultural rights

By Kumar Krishnan*  The question of Tibet has once again entered international discourse, raising difficult questions about human rights, religious freedom, cultural identity, language, and the relationship between political power and the rights of indigenous communities. On 20 August 2026, the Kashag and the Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile jointly organised a solidarity prayer service and peace march to mark the 49th day since the death of Lobga Rangzen, a Tibetan activist who died after self-immolating on 2 July in front of the United Nations Headquarters in New York.

IMF's policies 'stabilise' external creditors' balance sheets, 'generate' crisis in Africa

By Grieve Chelwa, Vijay Prashad   Across Africa, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) presents itself as the custodian of macroeconomic stability. Its latest Article IV staff reports on Ethiopia . Malawi , Nigeria , South Africa , and Zambia are written for economies with very different histories and institutions. Yet they converge on a familiar prescription: fiscal consolidation, tighter monetary policy, market-determined exchange rates, subsidy reform, deregulation and ‘private-sector-led growth’. No serious economist can dismiss macroeconomic stability.