Live
- Account Aggregators facilitating loan disbursement worth Rs 4,000 cr a month
- Over 47,000 acres of crops inundated in Myanmar
- Andhra Pradesh CM N. Chandrababu Naidu Meets Prime Minister Modi at Global Renewable Energy Investors Meet
- Our work in first 100 days gives a reflection of speed and scale: PM Modi
- Yellow-eyed penguin wins New Zealand's Bird of the Year
- Three IS militants killed in Iraq
- 40 civilians killed in paramilitary forces attack in Sudan: Resistance committee
- South Korea: Three dead after fishing vessel capsizes near Gunsan
- Kush Maini handed penalty after surviving crash in Azerbaijan race
- Punjab FC head coach Dilmperis hails captain Luca as ‘great leader’
Telangana told to provide info on office complex in Palamuru
The High Court at Hyderabad has questioned the Telangana State government as to how it can take up construction of Integrated District Office Complex in Mahbubnagar town in those lands on which there is a stay granted by the court against any construction activity. It directed the government to submit details in this regard within a week.
Hyderabad: The High Court at Hyderabad has questioned the Telangana State government as to how it can take up construction of Integrated District Office Complex in Mahbubnagar town in those lands on which there is a stay granted by the court against any construction activity. It directed the government to submit details in this regard within a week.
The division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Ramesh Ranganathan and Justice M S K Jaiswal gave these directions on Tuesday, while hearing a Public Interest Litigation petition filed by General Secretary of ‘Watch Voice of People’ organisation K Ganesh Rao, alleging that this complex and a new medical college is being built in violation of rules just to benefit ruling party bigwigs, who bought lands in the vicinity.
The petition alleged that the government is proposing to build new medical college and Integrated District Office Complex between Yedira and Palakonda villages of the town because ruling party bigwigs bought lands there.
When the counsel for the petitioner Sashi Kiran brought this to the notice of the bench, the bench questioned as to how the courts can interfere. It sought to know whether there is any law barring such decision of the government. The Additional Advocate General J Ramachandra Rao also argued that the decision falls exclusively in the purview of executive action.
The counsel for the petitioner showed to the bench the orders of the High Court, staying any construction in the subject lands. The bench questioned the AAG as to how construction of these buildings is being taken up when there is a stay order by the Court. It directed him to get complete details and adjourned the case by a week.
