Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar:
A joint review has been ordered to assess the current status of the city’s ambitious water supply project, launched with a long-term vision for a population of 5 million (50 lakhs). Claims and counterclaims have arisen over whether the project is fully operational. The order for the reassessment came from Justice Ravindra Ghughe and Justice Abhay Mhatre, following the review of a previous High Court hearing on the matter on Friday.
The municipal corporation, represented by Adv. Sambhaji Tope, claimed that the water treatment plant remains incomplete and that the chlorination room has not yet been constructed. However, the contractor GVPR Company, through senior counsel R N Dhorde, refuted these claims, asserting that both the water treatment plant and the chlorination room are complete. Tope countered that the room has been constructed without obtaining the necessary chlorination licence.
The project involves laying 1,900 km of internal pipelines, of which only 1,300 km have been installed, and even these are discontinuous in many places. Tope highlighted that until the pipeline network is continuous, it cannot be operational. Dhorde said that pipeline work is nearing completion, with 16 elevated storage reservoirs (ESRs) tanks ready and expected to be handed over to the municipal corporation by the end of March.
Scheme by company
The company will operate the project for one year, after which it will retain responsibility for maintenance and repairs for the next five years. The scheme is designed for a 30-year lifespan, with the city’s population projected to rise from 1.8 million (18 lakh) today to 2.7 million (27 lakh) by 2037 and 3.33 million (33 lakh) by 2052.
Currently, one pump is being used to supply 100 MLD of water to clean the pipeline. Subsequently, two pumps will supply 200 MLD, and ultimately six pumps will deliver 600 MLD. Senior counsel Rajendra Deshmukh presented the municipal corporation’s position, while ‘amicus curiae’ counsel Shambhuraje Deshmukh and petitioner’s counsel Amit Mukhedkar represented the petitioners’ arguments.