Supreme Court refuses to hear Telangana’s plea against Polavaram project

The Supreme Court on Monday (July 13, 2026) declined to take up a suit filed by the Telangana government under Article 131 of the Constitution seeking to restrain Andhra Pradesh from proceeding with preparatory and project-related activities for the proposed Polavaram–Banakacherla/Nallamalasagar Link Project, citing procedural deficiencies in the filing.

A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta observed that the suit could not be taken up for hearing until the Telangana government complied with the requisite procedural formalities.

“This matter cannot be taken up by the court today as there are some deficiencies and formalities to be fulfilled by the petitioner...,” the Bench observed.

Also read: Polavaram–Nallamala Sagar project will not harm Telangana, says A.P. Minister Nimmala

The apex court clarified that the matter would be listed by the Registry in accordance with the applicable rules once the procedural requirements were complied with.

Appearing for the Telangana government, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi submitted that the procedural defects would be cured and requested that the matter be listed thereafter.

The dispute concerns Andhra Pradesh’s proposal to divert surplus waters from the Godavari River at the Polavaram reservoir to the drought-prone Banakacherla region in Rayalaseema. The State has projected the project as a major initiative to improve irrigation, augment drinking water supply and recharge groundwater in water-scarce areas.

Telangana has consistently opposed the proposal, contending that it would encroach upon its lawful share of Godavari waters and contravene the award of the Godavari Water Disputes Tribunal. According to the State, the tribunal’s award continues to govern the allocation of the river’s waters among the basin States, and any unilateral diversion by Andhra Pradesh without following the prescribed legal process would be impermissible.

Monday’s suit is not Telangana’s first attempt to challenge the project before the Supreme Court. In January, the State withdrew a writ petition after the apex court expressed a prima facie view that it was not maintainable. A Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, Surya Kant, disposed of the petition while granting Telangana liberty to pursue any other remedy available in law, including the institution of a suit under Article 131 of the Constitution, which deals with disputes between States.

The Chief Justice had observed that a suit under Article 131 would be a “more comprehensive and effective” remedy since the controversy essentially involved an inter-State water dispute.

“Ultimately, at the end of the day, it is a water dispute... and you apprehend that their project might affect your share of the Godavari water,” the Bench had told Mr. Singhvi.

Telangana has further contended that the proposed project is contrary to the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014, which envisages cooperative federalism and the equitable utilisation of shared water resources following the bifurcation of the erstwhile State.