No New Dams in Upper Ganga Basin: Centre’s Affidavit to Supreme Court (UPSC GS-3 Environment + Disaster Management Notes)

The Headline Decision (21 May 2026)

In a hearing before the Supreme Court of India on 21 May 2026, the Union Government — through a joint affidavit filed by the Ministry of Jal Shakti and the Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change (MoEFCC) — placed on record that no new hydroelectric projects shall be permitted in the upper reaches of the Ganga river basin, i.e. the Alaknanda and Bhagirathi sub-basins of Uttarakhand. Only seven projects that are already commissioned or in an advanced stage of physical and financial progress have been allowed to continue.

This is the Centre’s most consequential ecology-vs-energy submission since the apex court imposed a moratorium on fresh clearances after the 2013 Kedarnath flash floods. For UPSC Civil Services aspirants writing GS-3 (Environment, Disaster Management, Infrastructure) and the May 24 Prelims, this single page settles the topic.

The 7 Projects That Are Allowed to Proceed

Of these, four are already commissioned and three have achieved substantial physical and financial progress, per the Union’s joint affidavit:

Combined installed capacity: ~2,158.5 MW. Everything else proposed for the Alaknanda–Bhagirathi system stands rejected by the Union itself — a position that effectively makes the 2013 judicial moratorium permanent policy.

Background — The 2013 Trigger

The case has its genesis in the catastrophic Kedarnath cloudburst and flash floods of June 2013, which killed more than 5,000 people and destroyed multiple under-construction hydel projects in Uttarakhand. The Supreme Court, hearing Alaknanda Hydro Power Co. Ltd. v. Anuj Joshi & Ors. and connected matters, imposed an interim moratorium on fresh environmental clearances for hydropower in the upper Ganga and constituted expert committees — the Ravi Chopra Committee (2014) and the B. P. Das Committee (2015) — to study cumulative ecological impact.

The Chopra Committee report concluded that 23 of 24 proposed projects in the para-glacial zone would cause “irreversible” damage to the river ecology and recommended that they be dropped. The Centre’s 21 May 2026 affidavit substantially accepts that recommendation — over a decade later.

Why This Matters for GS-3

1. Environment & Biodiversity

• The Alaknanda–Bhagirathi system drains the Gangotri Glacier and feeds the National Mission for Clean Ganga (Namami Gange).
• The basin sits in a para-glacial zone — high sediment, loose moraines, weak slopes — where tunnelling and reservoirs raise landslide and Glacial Lake Outburst Flood (GLOF) risk.
• Stretches from Gaumukh to Uttarkashi are notified Eco-Sensitive Zones (ESZ) under the Environment Protection Act, 1986.

2. Disaster Management

• 2013 Kedarnath floods and the February 2021 Chamoli (Rishiganga) disaster — which devastated the Tapovan Vishnugad project — both demonstrated that dam infrastructure amplifies downstream loss of life when triggered by GLOFs and rock-ice avalanches.
• The decision aligns with the Sendai Framework principle of “build back better” and risk-informed investment.

3. Energy Policy Trade-Off

• India’s commitment to 500 GW non-fossil capacity by 2030 assumes ~70 GW from hydro. Capping the Ganga basin shifts pressure onto Brahmaputra-basin hydro, pumped storage, and round-the-clock renewables.
• The Tehri Pumped Storage Project (1,000 MW) — explicitly retained — signals a policy preference for pumped storage hydro (PSH) as a clean-firming asset over fresh run-of-river dams.

4. Federalism & Fiscal Angle

• Uttarakhand’s hydro revenue plans take a direct hit; the state is expected to seek a special-category top-up under the 16th Finance Commission cycle.
• Centre–State Concurrent List entry (Forests, Wildlife) is operative here under Article 246.

Constitutional & Statutory Anchors

• Article 21 — Right to a clean environment (Subhash Kumar, M.C. Mehta).
• Article 48A & 51A(g) — Directive Principle and Fundamental Duty to protect the environment.
• Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 — empowers MoEFCC to notify ESZs.
• Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 — diversion of forest land for non-forest purposes.
• National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 — jurisdictional overlap on hydel clearances.

Probable Prelims Questions (May 24 Bank)

1. Which of the following projects in Uttarakhand are allowed to proceed per the Union’s May 2026 affidavit? (Tehri Stage-II, Vishnugad Pipalkoti, Tapovan Vishnugad are correct; Pancheshwar is NOT in this basin and is a red herring.)
2. The Ravi Chopra Committee was constituted to study — (a) wetland conservation (b) hydropower in the Ganga basin (c) e-flow norms (d) all of the above. Ans: (b)
3. The Bhagirathi Eco-Sensitive Zone notification was issued under which Act? Ans: Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.

Mains Angle (GS-3, 250 words)

“India’s hydropower ambition in the Himalayas must be reconciled with the para-glacial vulnerability of its source basins. Critically examine the Centre’s May 2026 affidavit on the Upper Ganga basin.”

Hook: 2013 Kedarnath → Chopra Committee → 2021 Chamoli → 2026 affidavit. Argue: precautionary principle wins, but storage gap must be filled by PSH + grid-scale batteries. Cite Tehri PSH as the bridge solution.

Quick Revision Box

• Date: 21 May 2026
• Filed by: Jal Shakti + MoEFCC (joint affidavit)
• Forum: Supreme Court of India
• Basin: Alaknanda + Bhagirathi (Upper Ganga)
• Projects retained: 7 (Tehri-II, Tapovan Vishnugad, Vishnugad Pipalkoti, Singoli Bhatwari, Phata Byung, Madhmaheshwar, Kaliganga-II)
• Combined capacity retained: ~2,158.5 MW
• Origin case: Post-2013 Kedarnath floods; Ravi Chopra Committee 2014

FAQs

What did the Centre tell the Supreme Court on 21 May 2026 about Ganga hydropower?

The Union filed a joint affidavit through Jal Shakti and MoEFCC stating that no new hydroelectric projects will be permitted in the Alaknanda–Bhagirathi (Upper Ganga) basin. Only seven projects already commissioned or in advanced construction will be allowed to proceed.

Which are the seven hydropower projects allowed to continue in the Upper Ganga basin?

Tehri Stage-II (1,000 MW), Tapovan Vishnugad (520 MW), Vishnugad Pipalkoti (444 MW), Singoli Bhatwari (99 MW), Phata Byung (76 MW), Madhmaheshwar (15 MW), and Kaliganga-II (4.5 MW).

Why is the Upper Ganga basin ecologically sensitive?

It lies in the para-glacial zone of the Himalayas, with loose moraines and high sediment load. The 2013 Kedarnath floods and the 2021 Chamoli disaster proved that large dam infrastructure here magnifies downstream loss of life during GLOFs and cloudbursts.

What was the Ravi Chopra Committee’s recommendation?

The 2014 Committee recommended that 23 of 24 proposed projects in the para-glacial zone be dropped because of irreversible ecological damage — a recommendation the Centre has now substantially accepted.

Is this topic relevant for UPSC Prelims on 24 May 2026?

Yes — it is among the highest-yield current-affairs items for GS-3 (Environment, Disaster Management) and a likely Mains essay anchor. Revise the project list, the 2013–2014–2021–2026 timeline, and the Article 48A linkage.

Related reads on Civils Gyani:

• UPSC Prelims 2026 — 48-Hour Last-Minute Revision and Exam-Day Strategy
• UPSC Prelims 2026 Admit Card & Exam-Day Rules
• Science & Technology Highest-Yield Topics

Primary sources: Union joint affidavit reported in Supreme Court proceedings, 21 May 2026; The Tribune, Outlook, Down To Earth, LiveLaw coverage; Supreme Court of India; PIB.

Quiz data missing.

Doubts on the Upper Ganga basin policy or Prelims revision? Call the Civils Gyani helpline: 7033005444