Six states have signed an agreement on the long-pending Kishau Multipurpose Project, clearing a significant political and financial hurdle for what would be one of India’s largest river valley projects. But researchers tracking the dam say critical studies remain incomplete and key questions about its safety and scale have gone unanswered.
Agreement Signing and Project Funding
Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan, Delhi and Haryana signed the inter-state agreement in New Delhi. Union Home Minister Amit Shah and Union Jal Shakti Minister C.R. Patil attended the signing ceremony. The project has been declared a national project, with the central government absorbing 90 percent of an estimated cost that media reports have put at between Rs 15,000 crore and Rs 15,624 crore. The remaining 10 percent will be divided among the participating states.
The dam will stand 232.6 metres tall on the Tons River, which forms part of the border between Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh. According to the government’s official statement, the project will store 1,562 million cubic metres of water, irrigate 97,000 hectares and generate 1,476 million units of hydropower annually. Delhi has been identified as the primary beneficiary. The government has also claimed that 25 percent of the Yamuna’s flow will be maintained as environmental discharge through the project.
A separate arrangement allows Himachal Pradesh to allocate its water share to Delhi and Rajasthan, which will in turn cover Himachal Pradesh’s costs for the power component.
Seismic and Safety Concerns
Water experts and environmental researchers have questioned the project’s premise.
Himanshu Thakkar, who works with the South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People, said building a dam of this scale in a seismically active region carries unacceptable risk. “The entire Himalayan region falls in an unstable and highly seismic zone,” he said. “If a dam of this height is built there, even a small earthquake could cause significant damage in the future.” Thakkar also rejected the government’s framing that the dam would help clean the Yamuna. “A separate, dedicated programme is needed for cleaning and rejuvenating the Yamuna, not simply trying to dilute the pollution by blocking the river’s water,” he said.
Mansi Ashar, a researcher with Himdhara Environmental Research and Action Collective who has studied the Tons River valley, said the project’s consequences extend well beyond the submergence zone. She cited a 2014 field study showing the dam would affect agriculture, animal husbandry, forests, fisheries and community livelihoods across the region. Ginger and tomato cultivation, she said, would be particularly hard hit.
The proposed submergence area covers 2,950 hectares, including 512 hectares of private agricultural land and 2,438 hectares of forest. Estimates from the study suggested approximately 5,498 people across 701 families would be displaced. Ashar noted that the agricultural land in the Tons valley supports three to four crops annually, and the forests and river form the backbone of the local economy. She said the displacement data is outdated and has not been fully verified at the field level, meaning the actual impact could be higher than estimates suggests.
Documentation Gaps and Inconsistencies
The agreement was signed on the basis of a 1994 framework agreement, with an in-principle consensus reached among states on June 16, 2026. But researchers say essential documents have not been made public. The project’s Environmental Impact Assessment, feasibility report and physical impact assessment remain unavailable for independent review. “The real challenges lie in the location of the dam,” Ashar said. “Environmental impact assessment reports are still needed to properly assess its viability.”
Documents from the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change also reveal inconsistencies in project specifications that remain unexplained. The minutes of the 47th Expert Appraisal Committee meeting, dated January 2026, list the power generation capacity as 422 megawatts across four units of 105.5 megawatts each. By contrast, records from the Himachal Pradesh Power Corporation Limited website, dated August 2018, and the agenda for the 29th EAC meeting in June 2022 both describe the project as a 660-megawatt facility with four 165-megawatt units. The irrigation area was listed as 97,076 hectares in the 2022 document. The discrepancy between 422 megawatts and 660 megawatts has not been addressed in the latest documentation.
Land classification has also shifted between documents. The 2026 EAC minutes break down the 2,950-hectare submergence area into 512 hectares of agricultural land, 250 hectares of reserve forest, 439 hectares of civil forest, 317 hectares of wasteland and drains, 33 hectares of inhabited land and 1,399 hectares of other land including river beds. A 2018 Himdhara report, compiled using information obtained through a Right to Information request, listed 512 hectares of private agricultural land and 2,438 hectares of forest, of which 689 hectares were community and privately owned forests and 1,749 hectares were state government forests. The 2026 document does not account for the 1,749 hectares of state government forest identified in the earlier filing. Researchers say this gap should be central to any environmental review.
Water allocation figures also differ between official statements. The January 2026 EAC document allocates 1,324 million cubic metres of water: Haryana receives 633 million cubic metres, Uttar Pradesh 411, Rajasthan 124, Delhi 80, Himachal Pradesh 42 and Uttarakhand 34. The government’s September 15 statement cites a total storage capacity of 1,562 million cubic metres without providing a state-wise breakdown.
Next Steps Before Construction
While the inter-state agreement marks a milestone, several steps remain before construction can begin. Cabinet approval, forest land transfer, environmental clearance and a detailed rehabilitation and resettlement plan have not yet been finalized. No public timeline has been set for completing these processes.
The project has been under discussion since the 1940s. Its signing does not guarantee construction will proceed in the near term, Ashar said, noting that its location presents fundamental challenges that cannot be resolved without transparent and rigorous assessment.