The southern bench of the National Green Tribunal has dismissed a petition filed by farmers from Erode, Karur, and Tiruppur districts challenging the renovation of the Lower Bhavani Project (LBP). This ruling permits the State government to proceed with the canal renovation.
The LBP canal, originating from the Bhavanisagar Dam in Erode and extending through Tiruppur to Karur, irrigates two lakh acres of agricultural land across these districts.
Built between 1948 and 1955, the State government proposed its reconstruction and modernisation in 2020, and work commenced on May 1, 2023, with an estimated total cost of ₹709.6 crore. However, it faced pushback from a section of farmers.
An application before the bench, comprising Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana and expert member Satyagopal Korlapati, filed by several irrigation councils and village panchayats against the proposed extension, renovation, and modernisation of the Lower Bhavani Sub Basin Project that will concretise existing irrigation canals within the 83,975-hectare irrigation area of the LBP.
The petitioners contended that moving forward without public consultation, an environmental impact assessment, and environmental clearance could severely impact the groundwater table and exacerbate drinking water scarcity in the region. However, it was argued that since the renovation and modernisation of the 65-year-old canal would neither increase its capacity nor expand the area of irrigated lands, environmental clearance was not required.
Additionally, in response to the petitioners’ claims that 4,00,000 trees would be cut down, the government stated that only 14,158 trees — those that have naturally grown on the canal’s side slopes, obstructing water flow and damaging existing canal and masonry structures — had been identified for removal.
The bench also noted that the project proposed bed concrete lining for only 23.84 km of the 200 km length of the main LBP canal, specifically in the areas upstream and downstream of the drainage culverts. Therefore, addressing water seepage in the entire LBP canal was not a relevant concern, the bench noted and dismissed the petition.
