Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court on Wednesday stayed GO 47 which was issued on June 30, 2021, to allot five acres in Hitec City to All India Velama Association and Kamma Vari Seva Sanghala Samakhya for constructing community centres.
The division bench of Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice N. Tukaramji issued the interim orders on a PIL filed by A. Vinayak Reddy, a retired economic professor of KU in Warangal, who challenged the allocation on the grounds that the government did not follow due procedures.
Subsequently, the court directed the parties concerned not to undertake constructions or other works on the land parcels, until further orders.
The petitioner said that procedure was not followed as there was no auction of land or tenders called for, before the allotments. He also submitted that both castes are considered generally economically wealthy.
Sarasani Satyam Reddy, counsel for the petitioner, argued that the allotment violates the Constitution, which stated that deprived sections or castes could benefit from free land allocations. He also brought to the notice of the court that people from these castes are affluent and had headed governments for several years or are still in power.
In an earlier instance of adjudication of the PIL, the bench had observed that such an allotment would encourage caste politics.
On Wednesday, Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan observed that the said allotment was contrary to the catena of judgments by the Supreme Court regarding the allocation of lands without conducting auctions and free land allotments to groups. He also reminded that the High Court recently cancelled land allotments to Sai Sindhu Foundation (belonging to the chairman of Hetero Pharma) on lease to run a cancer hospital.
Not agreeing with the contentions of the government and counsels for the two associations, the bench issued interim stay orders and adjourned the petition to August 2.
When counsel representing one of the associations requested the court to permit them to fence the land, as some construction work had been done, the bench expressed anger and observed that it was nothing but land grabbing. The bench then reiterated that no work shall not be done on the said lands.
