AP Minister Anil Kumar welcomes High Court's decision on Polavaram works

Andhra Pradesh Water Resources and Irrigation Minister Anil Kumar Yadav on Friday lauded the High Court's decision of quashing the stay on the execution of Polavaram project works.

The state High Court on Thursday lifted the stay imposed by a lower court on the state government's decision to go for reverse tendering by cancelling Polavaram Hydel project.

Yadav told ANI that the new contractor Megha Engineering and Infrastructure Ltd (MEIL) is formally starting the Polavaram project headworks (balance) and the 960 MW hydropower project.

"The engineers have said that the project would be fully completed by June 2021," said Yadav.

Yadav further slammed TDP for accusing YSRCP government of stopping the Polavaram project.

"Earlier TDP government boasted too much about the Polavaram construction work but the reality is that not even 50 per cent of the construction works were completed. The then TDP government sat idle for the first three years," said Yadav.

Welcoming the decision, Yadav said that the decision on Polavaram project has hampered the opposition party and now all obstacles to the project construction have been cleared and work will resume once the Godavari floods are reduced.

In a press statement released, Yadav also said that public money has been saved by the reverse tendering process. (ANI)

Previously, the Navayuga group had filed a petition against the government's decision and the lower court had ordered stay on the project.

After an enquiry into the issue, the High Court lifted the stay and issued permission to make agreements with the new contractor. By this, the project has got a green signal to resume the works.

The High Court agreed with the Advocate General's argument that the writ petition has no value after the arbitration proceedings began and also agreed with his argument that the Navayuga group has not approached the court with genuine intention.

The High Court also upheld the lower court's injunction order of not to encash bank guarantees. The High Court also erred the lower court's ruling.