CURE Bill Could Face Legal Challenges in Court: Akbar
The Chandrayangutta MLA strongly objected to the ‘Adjustment or refund of excess tax paid’ provision.
Hyderabad:Questioning the reasons behind dividing GHMC into three corporations and bringing them under a single region, AIMIM floor leader Akbaruddin Owaisi raised serious concerns over the limited role proposed in the CURE Bill for elected representatives in city development.
Taking part in the debate before the passage of the Core Urban Region (Integrated Governance) Bill, 2026 in the Assembly, he argued that the sweeping powers vested in the Apex Council and Executive Committee proposed in the Bill would effectively overshadow elected bodies. Pointing to what he described as major shortcomings in the legislation, he said the Telangana government should reconsider these lapses and make the necessary amendments, warning that the Bill could otherwise face legal challenges in court.
The Chandrayangutta MLA strongly objected to the ‘Adjustment or refund of excess tax paid’ provision. Under this clause, citizens lose their right to claim a refund on excess tax paid if they do not do so within 30 days. Legally, this extremely narrow window can be challenged as highly arbitrary, punitive, and a violation of the Right to Property (Article 300A), which dictates that the state cannot deprive citizens of property or funds without fair and reasonable legal procedures.
He also demanded clarity on the actual reason for dividing GHMC into three corporations has not been stated. “There is already a shortage of employees in the existing GHMC, and they are saying that salaries are not sufficient. For the newly established three corporations, how many employees are needed, and how will they bring in that many people?” he wondered.
Akbaruddin also questioned the proposed sewerage charges under the new Bill, asking how fees can be collected from residents when many areas still lack sewerage lines and even basic water supply. He alleged that the `1,400-crore underground cabling contracts in Hyderabad was awarded to a single company that continues to secure major government contracts. He questioned why the firm receives timely payments while the government cites a lack of funds for fee reimbursement, farmers, and public welfare. He also claimed that details of payments made to the company after the Congress came to power were not being disclosed under RTI, and argued that such large contracts should be distributed among smaller contractors instead of being given to one company.
