HYDERABAD: The Telangana High Court on Monday vacated its interim order restraining land acquisition for the Phase-II Metro Rail Project in the city and permitted authorities to proceed with the MGBS-Chandrayanagutta stretch, subject to strict compliance with the law.
Justice NV Shravan Kumar allowed an interlocutory application filed by the state and other authorities, thereby setting aside the interim order dated January 10, 2025, passed in a writ petition filed by Mahammed Abdul Raoof and seven others.
The petitioners had challenged orders passed by the Hyderabad district collector under Section 15(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, rejecting their objections to the proposed acquisition.
They contended that the acquisition disproportionately affected properties on one side of the road, resulting in substantial loss of houses and long-running commercial establishments. They also questioned the proposed 100-foot road widening, survey and alignment, and alleged that the compensation offered was substantially below the prevailing market value.
The authorities submitted that the alignment was based on the HMDA master plan and GHMC’s road development plan, with surveys conducted using drone and LiDAR technology. They also said negotiations had resulted in consent awards of up to `81,000 per square yard, apart from structural compensation and rehabilitation and resettlement benefits.
The court observed that determining Metro alignment and technical feasibility falls primarily within the domain of expert authorities. Relying on the Supreme Court judgment in Union of India v. Kushala Shetty, it held that judicial review in such technical matters is limited to cases involving arbitrariness, mala fides or violation of statutory or constitutional provisions.
Considering the larger public interest and the need for continuity of the Metro network, the court permitted execution of the project. However, it clarified that all questions concerning the legality and procedural compliance of the land acquisition proceedings remain open for consideration at the final hearing of the writ petition.