No Coercive Action on IDPL Lands in Balapur, Kukatpally: Telangana High Court

Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court on Friday directed the state government to not take coercive steps in relation to the acquisition of land allotted to Indian Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Limited (IDPL) at Balapur and Kukatpally until a single judge hearing the matter took a decision.

A vacation bench comprising Justice E.V. Venugopal and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin passed the interim direction while hearing a house motion appeal filed by IDPL seeking urgent relief against proceedings concerning the acquisition of its land.

The dispute pertains to the Rangareddy district collector taking back in 2008, 891.38 acres of land allotted to IDPL by the state government for industrial purposes in the 1990s. The collector took back the land stating that IDPL had violated the conditions of the allotment by leasing out the lands and buildings.

The erstwhile Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) on February 6, 2008, stayed implementation of the collector’s proceedings. This was challenged by the state government and a single judge of the High Court on May 5 issued interim orders, suspending the BIFR orders and upholding the resumption of land. The single judge kept pending the main petition for further hearing in June.

Challenging the single judge`s orders, the IDPL filed an urgent appeal through house motion before the vacation bench.

Appearing for IDPL, Additional Solicitor-General P. Narasimha Sharma submitted that the industry was still operational and that two plants were functioning on the premises.

The ASG argued that the land continued to be used for industrial purposes and alleged that officials of the Cyberabad municipal administration were attempting to take possession by erecting signboards soon after interim orders were passed by the single judge. He contended that although the land remained in IDPL’s possession, authorities were portraying it in official records as being under state control based on the collector’s orders.

Representing the state government, additional advocate-general Tera Rajnikant Reddy and senior advocate S. Niranjan Reddy argued that the BIFR and the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (AAIFR) had since been abolished, rendering the earlier orders ineffective.

The state contended that the BIFR had passed the February 6, 2008, order without issuing notice and lacked jurisdiction to intervene in the collector’s proceedings. It was argued that even otherwise, the interim protection granted by BIFR could not survive indefinitely, particularly after the abolition of both BIFR and AAIFR.

After hearing both sides, the division bench noted that the single judge had not permitted any further action relating to the land acquisition during the pendency of the matter. Observing that there was no need to revisit earlier stages of the dispute, the Bench said the matter was scheduled for hearing before the single judge on June 22, and directed that the issue be decided expeditiously.

The court disposed of the appeal while directing the state government not to take any action concerning the acquisition of land until completion of the hearing in the pending petition before the single judge.

Rice Mill Scam: Telangana High Court Refuses to Quash FIRs Against Millers

Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings against several rice millers accused of large-scale misappropriation of paddy entrusted with them under the custom milling rice (CMR) scheme, holding that the allegations disclosed prima facie cognisable offences that required thorough investigation.

Justice J. Sreenivas Rao dismissed a batch of 58 criminal petitions filed by rice millers who sought quashing of FIRs registered against them on the complaints of the officials of the Telangana Civil Supplies Corporation Limited (TGCSCL), which had entrusted paddy to various rice mills during the kharif marketing season (KMS) 2022-23 for conversion into custom milled rice to be supplied to the government and the Food Corporation of India (FCI).

The petitioners contended that the dispute was contractual and civil in nature and argued that the corporation ought to have invoked arbitration or civil recovery proceedings instead of initiating criminal prosecution. They also questioned the authority of the TGCSCL to lodge the complaint and argued that the ingredients of cheating and criminal breach of trust were absent.

Opposing the pleas, Advocate-General Sudershan Reddy and public prosecutor Palle Nageshwar Rao argued that the paddy was entrusted to the millers for a specific public purpose under a welfare-oriented procurement scheme and that the rice millers had dishonestly diverted and misappropriated the stock for personal gain instead of supplying equivalent quantities of custom milled rice.

The prosecution submitted that more than 3,600 rice mills participated in the scheme across Telangana and that, except for the petitioners’ mills, all others had supplied the required CMR to the Corporation and FCI. It was alleged that the petitioners diverted huge quantities of paddy and caused losses running into thousands of crores of rupees to the government.

After examining the contractual framework and the allegations, the court held that the existence of arbitration clauses or civil remedies did not bar criminal prosecution when the complaint prima facie discloses criminal offences.

The court observed that the corporation had entrusted paddy to the rice millers for a specific purpose and that the allegations indicated failure to deliver equivalent CMR, coupled with disappearance of entrusted stock from the mill premises.

Justice Sreenivas Rao held that whether or not the petitioners had dishonestly diverted or misappropriated the paddy were disputed questions of fact that could only be examined during investigation and trial. The court also ruled that the High Court, while exercising powers under Section 528 of BNSS, could not conduct a detailed examination of evidence or adjudicate disputed factual issues at the threshold stage.

The court held that delay in lodging the complaint was not sufficient to quash the proceedings, particularly in cases involving alleged misuse of public funds and welfare procurement schemes.

Telangana HC Orders Probe into Alleged KGBV Bunk Bed Procurement Scam

Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court has directed the school education department to conduct a detailed enquiry into allegations of irregularities in the procurement of bunk beds for Kasturba Gandhi Balika Vidyalayas (KGBVs) across the state, while disposing of a writ petition filed by former MLA Peddi Sudershan Reddy.

The petitioner alleged that contracts for the supply and installation of 45,360 bunk beds along with mattresses and pillows were awarded in violation of tender conditions, resulting in substantial loss to the public exchequer. He contended that the original contracts had lapsed after expiry of the stipulated 120-day completion period.

He alleged that the bunk beds were being procured at prices exceeding `33,000 per unit, whereas similar products had earlier been purchased at approximately `15,300 per unit.

During the hearing, the Vigilance Commission informed the court that the complaint had been forwarded to the school education department on January 13, 2026, for enquiry and appropriate action.