Union government returns Karnataka's request for wildlife clearance for Mahadayi basin projects, calling it sub-judice
The Union government has returned Karnataka’s proposal for wildlife clearance for the proposed Kalasa-Bhanduri drinking water project in the Mahadayi river basin, saying the matter
The Union government has returned Karnataka’s proposal for wildlife clearance for the proposed Kalasa-Bhanduri drinking water project in the Mahadayi river basin, saying the matter was sub-judice. Bhupender Yadav, Union Minister for Environment, Forests and Climate Change, has written a letter to Chief Minister D.K. Shivakumar, saying “the matter shall be considered afresh in accordance with the directions of the Supreme Court in future.” “In reference to your letter dated December 23, 2025, regarding wildlife clearance for the Kalasa-Bhanduri Drinking Water Supply Scheme proposed to be implemented near Khanapur taluk in Belagavi district, I would like to inform that the Government of Karnataka had filed I.A. No. 219672/2023 in C.A. No. 4505/2023 arising out of SLP(C) No. 19312/2019 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on 18.10.2023, challenging the order dated 29.03.2023 of the Chief Wildlife Warden, Goa.
The matter is presently pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court,’’ the letter read. It further said that in view of the pendency of the matter before the apex court and the issues requiring resolution between the concerned States, the wildlife clearance proposal has been returned to the State government at this juncture. Responding to this, Mohan Katarki, a senior advocate who represents Karnataka in the Supreme Court, said Karnataka would move the Supreme Court for clarification soon.
“It is surprising that the Union government is taking cognisance of an extra-territorial order issued by Goa which is plainly contrary to its own published Award of the Tribunal. We will move
the Supreme Court for clarifications. The said letter was issued by Goa purportedly under the Wildlife Protection Act of 1972. But it was beyond the jurisdiction of the officer,’’ Mr. Kataraki said.
The BriefWire