HC asks state if GO111 is to be revoked vis-a-vis Osama Sagar and Himayat Sagar

Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court has sought clarification from the state government if it has any proposal to revoke Government Order (GO) 111, dated March 8, 1996, on measures to protect the Osmansagar and Himayatasagar.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Vijaysen Reddy was dealing with a batch of PILs and petitions related to issues of GO 111 and challenging the auction of Kokapet lands. Justice Reddy drew the notice of the Chief Justice to a news report that Chief Minister K. Chandrashekar Rao had announced that GO 111 would be revoked within six months, and sought a clarification from the government.

The bench, expressing its surprise, directed Additional Advocate General Ramachander Rao to get clear instructions from the office of the CM on this matter within 24 hours.

“Is it true, or the report may be misleading. Better find out what is going on and what is in the minds of the state administration at its higher levels about continuance of GO 111,“ Chief Justice Kohli said.

The CJ observed, “Why are we doing this exercise…? If the government is thinking of revoking GO 111, then there is no point in adjudicating the writ petitions and the PILs. It is not proper on the part of the government to take such an action… please check and come back thoroughly with full details, Chief Justice directed Ramachander Rao.

Replying to a query from the Chief Justice, the additional AG stated that he was not aware of the news report and assured the court that he would ask the CM about this and come back with a reply on Wednesday.

In reply to Monday’s court queries about the non-catchment area in Vattinagulapally village, in terms of ETPRI, the additional AG furnished the details. It was stated that 87 land parcels spread across 948 acres, divided among 377 owners, was the non-catchment area in the village, but has been included in purview of GO111.

Vivek Reddy, senior counsel appearing for one of the petitioners in the writ petition, who owned 17 acres of land in Vattinagulapally opposite the US consulate, stated that the petitioner had been denied permission to construct high-rise buildings due to GO 111. Counsel informed the court that the government has taken a decision on August 18, 2021, permitting construction of high-rise buildings beside the US consulate, which stood diagonally opposite to his petitioner’s lands.

He submitted that the recently auctioned land parcels, measuring 49 acres and 94 guntas at Kokapet, are just 700 metres away from the full-tank level of the Osmansagar, whereas his petitioner’s lands were 3.5 km away from the lake. “The government is allowing construction of the high-rise buildings in the auctioned land but not on his client’s land for the past 25 years, citing G O111,” counsel Vivek Reddy submitted.

While taking a serious note of the double-standard of the, Chief Justice Kohli observed, “When you want to act, you act with alacrity; and when you don’t want to act, even four and a half years is not good enough for you to act. You started it because you were mentally prepared for it. You want comprehensive development of the entire area (Kokapet lands). For this, you appoint a consultant, the report is considered and an agency is identified for taking up different works. Parties are identified and tenders floated stating that it is the intention of the state government to encourage development."

"But, when the government does not want to accord permissions to other private landowners, then the state sits back, constitutes committees. Then, these committees call for report No.1, 2, 3 and so on, and then the government expands the scope of the body that was constituted,” the CJ added.

The bench directed senior counsel Niranjan Reddy appearing for the HMDA to make aware all the purchasers of auctioned Kokapet lands that they will not be permitted to commence high rise building constructions till construction of the sewerage treatment plant, as also the sewage and storm water facilities are created and that the terms of GOs135 (as regards the setting up of own sewerage treatment plant) and 168 will be applicable to all the purchasers. The case was adjourned to Wednesday.