HYDERABAD: The Telangana High Court has criticized HYDRAA for its alleged discriminatory actions regarding the demolition of structures and land fencing, even those currently under litigation. The court questioned why no action has been taken against the Barrister Fatima Owaisi Educational Campus, which reportedly stands in the Full Tank Level (FTL) area of Salkam Cheruvu in the Old City.
Justice NV Shravan Kumar took note of the institution’s construction within the lake without the necessary approvals and mandated a comprehensive inquiry into the actions of officials who failed to act over the years. He directed the principal secretaries of various departments, including Revenue and Municipal Administration, to investigate and report back. The court also required all parties involved, including the institution, to provide statements, scheduling a follow-up hearing for July 3.
During the proceedings, the court raised concerns about student safety and suggested that students seeking free education be transferred to local government institutions to minimize disruption to their education.
The court was addressing a petition from advocate Vijay Gopal, who submitted satellite images showing the lake and surrounding areas, alleging negligence by authorities despite repeated complaints.
In a series of hearings throughout Thursday, the judge demanded explanations from HYDRAA and other government departments regarding how such significant construction could have occurred without oversight since 2005. “Why has HYDRAA not intervened in these cases? If notices have been issued, why has no action been taken?” the judge inquired, highlighting that enforcement had only begun after the case was brought to court.
The judge questioned the education department for granting permits to the institution. When representatives from various departments requested more time to respond, the judge remarked, “Isn’t it evident that these structures are located within a waterbody?”
The judge also criticized the chairman of the Lake Protection Committee for the lack of action against unauthorized construction in water bodies, asking, “Why is only one institution receiving special treatment?”
Noticing that counsels were not receiving adequate support from officials, the judge inquired about the lack of required permissions, the issuance of occupancy certificates, and how utilities and effluent management are being handled.
Frustrated with the unresponsive answers, the judge expressed, “You are not clarifying whether they possess the necessary permissions. Why are responsible authorities not providing accurate answers?”
Referencing a Supreme Court decision regarding demolitions, the judge emphasized that notifications are not required if constructions lack the proper approvals.
The judge observed that the structural integrity of the construction within the lake is fundamentally a technical issue and criticized the authorities for their inaction throughout the construction process. “It is astonishing that over the years, from the initial stages to completion, no steps were taken to verify the legality of these constructions,” he remarked, subsequently adjourning the hearing.
