HC Dismisses Appeal on Alienation of Temple Land

Hyderabad: A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court dismissed a writ appeal relating to alienation of temple land at Saidabad, Hyderabad, thereby affirming its protection. The panel comprising Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice Gadi Praveen Kumar upheld the order of the single judge which set aside a compromise permitting alienation of temple land. The panel was hearing a writ appeal filed by Sri Guru Pershad, an archaka of the Sri Hanuman Temple. The appellant questioned the order of the single judge, who set aside proceedings dated March 31, 1990, issued by the commissioner of endowments permitting a compromise that would result in parting with nearly 1,000 square yards of temple land in favour of private individuals. The single judge while allowing the writ petition filed by Sri Hanuman Temple Bhaktha Mandali, held that the compromise sanctioned under Section 89 of the AP Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 had become legally unenforceable. The judge noted that the statutory precondition for invoking Section 89 pendency of a suit or proceeding was absent, as all related litigations had concluded. The single judge relied on the binding civil court judgment which conclusively declared that the entire extent of five bams, equivalent to 2,700 square yards, belonged to the temple. It was held that any administrative compromise permitting alienation of a portion of such land would be contrary to the civil court decree and amount to impermissible alienation of public trust property. Accordingly, the impugned proceedings dated March 31, 1990, were set aside and the authorities were restrained from implementing them. After hearing the parties, the panel found no error in the reasoning or conclusions of the single judge. The panel dismissed the writ appeal.

Oral Surgeons Plea Against NMC Curbs

Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the Telangana High Court admitted a writ plea filed by a group of MDS Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons challenging public notices issued by the Telangana State Medical Council (TGMC) and the National Medical Commission (NMC) restraining them from performing aesthetic and hair transplant procedures. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by Dr Madhuri Bannigol and nine others. The petitioners sought to declare the actions of the Dental Council of India and others in issuing the impugned public notice and the earlier notice as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, and in violation of the Constitution. The Telangana Medical Council, through notices issued in June and July 2025, stated that dentists, including oral and maxillofacial surgeons, do not possess the requisite qualifications to undertake aesthetic and hair transplant procedures and contented that such practices fall outside their authorised scope. Justice Bheemapaka directed the respondent authorities to file their response.

HC Directs Eviction of Illegal Graveyard from Lake FTL

Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti of the Telangana High Court directed the eviction and demolition of illegal graveyard structures raised within the full tank level (FTL) of Bandham Cheruvu at Khajipet jagir, Warangal district, while ordering the authorities to allot alternative land for the graveyard. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by N. Nagender and 25 others, residents of Revenue Colony, Widows Colony and adjoining localities at Hanamkonda. The petitioners complained of inaction by the authorities against construction of a graveyard within the FTL of Bandham Cheruvu in Survey No. 32, Khajipet jagir, without permission from the competent authorities. The petitioners challenged the original allotment of three acres of land for a graveyard within the tank limits and its subsequent modification by the joint collector, contending that the land formed part of the tank bed (shikam land) and that any allotment or construction therein was impermissible in law. It was contended that despite repeated representations, pillars and other structures were erected within the FTL, posing environmental and public safety concerns. The judge noted that the core issue i.e., legality of construction within the FTL, remained unanswered by the respondent authorities in their response. Reliance was placed by the petitioners on binding precedents of the Supreme Court and Telangana High Court holding that water bodies and their catchment areas cannot be encroached upon or regularised. Pursuant to earlier directions, a joint inspection was conducted, and a report was placed before the court by the district collector. The report confirmed that the disputed land fell within the FTL and buffer zone of Bandham Cheruvu and that multiple habitations were located within the same area. After considering the inspection report, pleadings and the law governing protection of water bodies, Justice Jukanti held that any construction within the FTL was illegal and liable to be removed. The judge placed reliance on the doctrine of public trust, as expounded by the apex court, observing that the Constitution imposed a solemn duty upon the State as well as citizens to protect natural resources. Though the right to property is no longer a fundamental right, it continues to enjoy constitutional protection, subject always to the larger public interest. Any construction within the FTL, the judge observed, was per se illegal and could not be regularised by administrative indulgence. The judge accordingly directed the authorities to evict encroachments and demolish all illegal structures identified in the joint survey. At the same time, the judge directed the district collector to identify and allot alternative land for relocation of the graveyard within a stipulated time frame and restrained any further activity on the disputed land, notwithstanding any permissions or circulars issued by municipal authorities.