HC: Vattinagulapally not in GO 69, land owners can raise structures
Deccan Chronicle.| Vujjini Vamshidhar
With the court orders, the land owners in survey numbers 173, 178 to 214, 216 to 260 and 512 of Vattinagulapally can go for development
The main contention of the petitioners was that the government in 1996 notified 84 villages that fell under GO 111. But, it did not make any efforts to demarcate the catchment area and non- catchment area in each village. DC Image
HYDERABAD: The Telangana High Court on Friday allowed land owners to make commercial and high-rise development works in 87 land parcels spread across 948 acres in Vattinagulapally.
Earlier, construction approvals had been denied on the ground that the village was mentioned in GO 111 of March 3, 1996, with regard to safety measures in order to safeguard Osmansagar and Himayatsagar.
With the court orders, now the land owners in survey numbers 173, 178 to 214, 216 to 260 and 512 of Vattinagulapally can go for development works, after getting approval from the authorities concerned. The land is divided among 377 owners.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili also made it clear that the GO 69 dated 12 April 2022, which made modifications to GO 111, was not applicable to these lands. The court also paved the way for the said lands to proceed with the same developments as adjoining lands like Neopolis, Kokapet SEZ, Puppalguda, US Consulate, Financial district and Q City.
"The government reports stated that the said lands fell outside the catchment area of Osmansagar and Himayatsagar lakes, so the question of application of GO 69 to the lands does not arise and the land shall certainly be subjected to same development regulations applicable to the adjoining lands," the bench passed orders.
Some of the land owners approached the High Court complaining that though their lands did not fall in the catchment area, they were denied developmental works in their lands on pretext of GO 111. They also challenged the applicability of recent G.O 69 upon their lands.
The main contention of the petitioners was that the government in 1996 notified 84 villages that fell under GO 111. But, it did not make any efforts to demarcate the catchment area and non- catchment area in each village. They also brought to the notice of the court that Vattinagulapally village had unique geography and drainage pattern as compared to other villages.
Their main contention of the petitioners was that the government was permitting high rise buildings to be constructed beside the US Consulate, which was diagonally opposite to their lands. They also brought to the notice of the court that recently auctioned lands at Kokapet were just 700 meters away from the full tank level of the Osmansagar lake, whereas the petitioner’s lands were admittedly at a distance of three-and-a-half kilometres away from Osmansagar lake. The government allowed the construction of high-rise buildings in auctioned lands but was not permitting any constructions in their lands for 25 years.