The Karnataka government’s move to proceed with the Sharavathi Pumped Storage Project without securing full environmental and forest clearances has prompted strong opposition from environmentalists and local communities.
The Sharavathi Pumped Storage Hydroelectric Project, proposed by the Karnataka Power Corporation Limited (KPCL), is a Rs 10,240 crore (as of 2025) infrastructure initiative intended to generate 2,000 MW of clean energy by storing and releasing water between two existing reservoirs to balance grid loads. i.e Talakalale and Gerusoppa reservoirs, which are situated downstream of Liganamakhi reservoir on the Sharavathy river. The project aims to support Karnataka’s renewable energy transition and address peak electricity demands, and if implemented, will become India’s largest pumped storage facility.
The KPCL Board first approved the project way back in 2016 following the sanction of state government to explore and prepare pre-feasibility reports for the pumped-hydro project in Sharavathi Valley. Then approved by the Central Electricity Authority (CEA) in August 2024, the project was initially planned for completion within five years by 2030. The Karnataka Power Corporation Limited (KPCL) awarded the project contract to Megha Engineering & Infrastructure Ltd. (MEIL) in May 2024. The project claims to offer social benefits, including employment opportunities for locals during the construction phase and the implementation of local area development works.
However, the project has triggered serious concerns among conservationists, scientists, and local communities. Home to endangered species like the Lion-Tailed Macaque, the affected area is ecologically sensitive, according to the site inspection report by the Forest Department. According to a report by the New Indian Express, the project proposal stated that a total of 142.763 hectares of land is proposed for use in the Sharavathi Pumped Storage Project, of which 54.155 hectares is classified as forest land, including 14.582 hectares that fall within the Lion-Tailed Macaque (LTM) Sanctuary, which houses an endangered Lion-Tailed Macaque population. As per the project details, 113.21 hectares of private land and 39.79 hectares of government/forest land are proposed to be acquired for the project, which is expected to affect 4 villages, with a total of 130 project-affected families.
The conflict escalated in March 2025, when local activists, students, and religious leaders attempted a peaceful protest in Sagar Taluk under banners like Jan Sangrama Parishat and Sharavathi Ulisi Horata Okkuta. The protesters was denied entry to the Kuvempu Rangamandira, where the District Magistrate was attending an event. Protesters raised complaints over lack of access to project documents such as the EIA and the DPR, raising transparency concerns.
Meanwhile, in early 2024, Larsen & Toubro (L&T) challenged the tender process in the Karnataka High Court, alleging that tenders were floated before the required environmental and forest clearances were obtained. The court imposed a temporary stay, effectively stalling the project.
Earlier, a Ballari-based conservationist, Edward Santosh Martin, had questioned the legality of the survey and geotechnical investigation work being carried out by the Karnataka Power Corporation Limited (KPCL) at the Sharavathi Valley Lion-Tailed Macaque sanctuary. Following which, the survey was stayed.
Adding to the legal complications, the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) rejected forest clearance in May 2025, citing inadequate compensatory afforestation and potential landslide risk. The State Board for Wildlife, while approving the project with conditions in January 2025, had emphasized minimal tree felling and underground construction, but the final NBWL and MoEFCC approvals remain pending.
Meanwhile, Mapping Malnad, a city-based non-governmental organisation, published a report on the project claiming that the Sharavathi Pumped Storage Hydroelectric Project by KPCL is progressing based on inadequate, misleading, and flawed data, raising serious concerns such as the underreporting of forest land diversion and potential ecological impacts.
As of June 2025, the project is stalled, with legal proceedings pending in the Karnataka High Court and key environmental clearances still withheld. For now, this ambitious green energy project hangs in limbo, caught between climate goals and ecological justice.
Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
Opposition against environmental degradation
Complaint against procedural violations
Refusal to give up land for the project
Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community
NA
Region Classification
Rural
Type of Land
Common and Private
Forest, Forest and Non-Forest
What was the action taken by the police?
How many people did the police detain or arrest?
NA
What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?
Did the person face any violence while in police custody?
If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?
If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?
Legislation under which the accused was charged
Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?
In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?
Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?
Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)
Status of Project
Original Project Deadline
2029
Whether the Project has been Delayed
Yes
Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users
Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence, Other environmental services, Residential area
Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict
No
Source/Reference
Most delays and obstacles to the project have been attributed to environmental clearances. \- Rejection by the Forest Advisory Committee due to technical and sanctuary boundary concerns \- The MoEFCC denial of forest clearance in May 2025 over risks like landslides and ecological damage \- A HC stay order issued in early 2024 focused on geotechnical surveys and tendering, due to lack of forest and wildlife clearance, not land dispute .
Total investment involved (in Crores):
₹
10240
Type of investment:
Investment Expected
Year of Estimation
2025
Has the Conflict Ended?
No
When did it end?
Why did the conflict end?
Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict
Legislations/Policies Involved
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.
Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute
Yes
What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?
What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?
Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:
Violation of free prior informed consent
Non-implementation/violation of FRA
Controversial land acquisition by the government
Legal Status:
In Court
Status of Case In Court
Disposed
Whether any adjudicatory body was approached
Name of the adjudicatory body
Name(s) of the Court(s)
Karnataka High Court
Case Number
Writ Appeal No.381 of 2024
Main Reasoning/Decision of court
Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:
Blackmail/threats/intimidation
Whether criminal law was used against protestors:
NA
Reported Details of the Violation:
NA
Date of Violation
Location of Violation
Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:
Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC)
PSUs Involved in the Conflict:
Karnataka Power Corporation Limited (KPCL)
Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?
No
Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached
Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:
Megha Engineering and Infrastructure
Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?
No
Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:
Sharavathi Kanive Ulisi Horata Okkuta
What was the action taken by the police?
How many people did the police detain or arrest?
NA
What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?
Did the person face any violence while in police custody?
If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?
If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?
Legislation under which the accused was charged
Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?
In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?
Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?
Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?
Asmita Sutar is an Architect and Urban Planner passionate about shaping sustainable communities through research and grassroots engagement. She also serves as an Assistant Professor in Urban and Regional Planning, bringing academic insight to her multidisciplinaryapproach.
As a State Researcher from Karnataka, Asmita investigates land and planning issues through the lenses of equity, governance, and community rights, with a focus on bridging the gap between policy and lived realities in India’s urban and rural landscapes.
