Velugumatla Demolition Victims Move High Court for Relief

Hyderabad: Victims of the Velugumatla demolitions have approached the Telangana High Court seeking directions to the state government for reconstruction of their demolished houses and compensation for the damage.

The petitioners also sought a writ of mandamus declaring proceedings dated January 17, 2026, issued by the Telangana Bhoodan Yagna Board, represented by the Special Chief Secretary and Chief Commissioner of Land Administration (CCLA), as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional. They contended that the impugned proceedings classify them as encroachers.

Talluri Venkata Narasamma and 23 others filed the writ petition challenging the demolition of their houses on lands claimed to have been allotted under the Bhoodan scheme.

The matter was listed before Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy. However, it could not be taken up due to paucity of time and was adjourned to March 24 following a mention by counsel for the petitioners, T. Srikanth Reddy.

According to the petition, the petitioners were assigned plots measuring 100 square yards each by the Bhoodan Yagna Board pursuant to a government order issued in 2012. The impugned proceedings issued by the Special Chief Secretary/CCLA declared them as unauthorised occupants of Bhoodan lands admeasuring Ac. 31-07 guntas in Velugumatla village.

HC lets standalone theatres collect parking fee

The Telangana High Court has set aside the orders of the single judge, which restrained the standalone cinema theatres in Hyderabad and other urban areas from collecting parking fees from persons if they produce a copy of the movie tickets.

While dealing with a petition filed by a law student from Hayathnagar against the Asian Konark theatre in Dilsukhnagar for collecting parking fee from him, the single judge had suspended GO Ms No. 121 dated July 20, 2021 vide interim orders issued on March 6, 2026. The GO Ms No. 121 allowed the owners of standalone cinema theatres to collect the parking fee from the persons who park their vehicles in their premises. The single judge had also directed the municipal administration department to communicate to the owners of standalone cinema theatres against collecting the parking fee from the cinemagoers.

Hearing an appeal against the single judge order, a division bench comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin made it clear that the single judge order applies only to the Asian Konark theatre in Dilsukhnagar, whose action the petitioner had challenged before the single judge for collecting the parking fee from him.

The bench opined that orders of the single judge in the writ petition “In Rem” (is against a thing), whereas the petitioner made only one theatre as the respondent. It has also made it clear that the appellant theatres — Sudharshan and RR Cinema or any such other theatre — can implead in the pending writ petition before the single judge and submit their contentions in this regard.

The single judge had based the interim order on the GO Ms No 63 dated Marcy 10, 2018, wherein it was clarified that according to building rules, commercial establishments, malls, multiplexes, theatres will not collect parking fees from any person, subject to certain conditions regarding the purpose and duration of visit.

In contrast to the GO issued in 2018, the government issued GO 121 in 2021, allowing standalone cinema theatres to collect the parking area because people other than cinemagoers were also parking their vehicles, creating a security issue.

HC seeks govt timeline for Waqf CEO appointment

The Telangana High Court has sought clarity from the state government on the appointment of a full-time Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to the Telangana State Wakf Board.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin directed the government to place on record its stand on three issues: whether the present incumbent holding full additional charge meets the prescribed eligibility criteria for appointment as full-time CEO; whether a person not meeting such criteria can be given full additional charge as a stop-gap arrangement; and whether the government proposes to appoint a regular CEO, along with a timeline. The court directed that details be submitted by April 9.

The Bench issued the directions while hearing an appeal filed by Syed Iftekhar Hussaini, who contended that the absence of a full-time CEO has affected the Board’s ability to discharge key statutory functions beyond routine administration. Referring to Section 23 of the Waqf Act, 1995, the appellant submitted that the CEO is the executive arm and ex officio secretary of the Board with significant statutory responsibilities.

Earlier, a single judge had dismissed the writ petition after considering the state’s counter-affidavit, which stated that Md. Asadullah, additional collector, was given charge as in-charge CEO on a full additional basis as a temporary measure due to administrative exigencies, to ensure the functioning of the Board is not affected pending a regular appointment.