Bhagirath: The government says the Ken-Betwa Link Project will largely resolve the water crisis in Bundelkhand. Does this claim have merit?
Himanshu Thakkar (HT): According to official documents, this project is essentially a plan to transport water out of Bundelkhand. A report by the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) also details how, instead of rectifying a past planning error, this project gives rise to a new one. Earlier planning for the Rajghat, Matatila, and other dams created water management issues within the Betwa basin. Now, to resolve that problem, water from the Ken River is being diverted to the Betwa so that new dams can be constructed in the upper Betwa region.
As for Bundelkhand, a former Collector of Panna had written to the Planning Commission and the Principal Secretary of the Madhya Pradesh Water Resources Department, stating that water in the Upper Ken basin was not being fully utilised; consequently, it merely appeared that there was surplus water in the Ken. He further noted that if the 1983 Ken Multipurpose Project were fully implemented, no surplus water would remain in the Ken; in-stead, that water would be consumed entirely to meet the irrigation and drinking water needs of Panna, Chhatarpur, and other areas within the Ken basin.
Today, the situation is the opposite. When the original Ken-Betwa project was conceived, Panna district was not even included in the list of beneficiaries. Later, when the question arose regarding what Panna would gain from the project, it was amended to incorporate some benefits for the district.
Under the original agreement, even if the planned diversion of water—intended to flow from the Daudhan dam into Madhya Pradesh via the Bari-yarpur and Gangau barrages—had been fully implemented, there would have been no actual surplus water left in the Ken. I believe that, historically, water belonging to Bundelkhand should have been—and still ought to be—utilised within and for the benefit of Bundelkhand. Instead, plans are now being made to divert that very water outside the region. And what will Bundelkhand get in return? In my view, it will suffer the greatest loss.
Furthermore, the natural flow of the Ken downstream will be severely impacted, while the upstream area will be transformed into a massive res-ervoir. Such large-scale deforestation and interference with the river system will have long-term environmental consequences that require serious assessment.
Secondly, while this is termed a “river-linking” project, technically it is essentially a water transfer and lift project. Water from the Ken is to be conveyed to the Betwa river via a canal. Since the Betwa lies at a higher elevation, the water will need to be lifted (pumped upwards) to reach it.
Bhagirath: There are hundreds of villages in Mahoba, Banda and Chhatarpur situated downstream of Daudhan dam. The area’s residents and farmers’ organisa-tions say the downstream region will bear the brunt of this project. What impact will it have, specifically on drinking water, irrigation, and agriculture?
HT: It will certainly have an impact. The Ken is a lifeline for Banda. Water flows in the river throughout the year. While the flow does diminish during the summer, it is not the case that the river dries up completely on most days. Banda city and its surrounding areas rely heavily on the Ken river for their water needs; the same applies to downstream villages. Whether for agricultural irrigation, drinking water, or groundwater recharge, the Ken river is vital to these regions in every respect. In a sense, If the river’s natural flow diminishes, it will directly impact all these activities. A review of the Environmental Impact Assessment or other available studies reveals no clear analysis regarding the consequences for downstream villages—specifically concerning water availability, agriculture, and the ecosystem.
(For complete interview, log on to downtoearth.org.in)
This interview was originally published as part of the article "Easy to displace" in the August 1-15, 2026 print edition of Down To Earth