VIJAYAWADA: The Andhra Pradesh High Court on Wednesday heard the Public Interest Litigation filed by Tirupati MP Maddila Gurumurthy and observed that the State government is well within its policy domain to frame measures aimed at promoting industrialisation and strengthening the Information Technology sector.
The division bench comprising Chief Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice Challa Gunaranjan remarked that in the present competitive global environment, attracting investments requires the State to offer appropriate incentives, noting that companies may otherwise prefer more favourable destinations in other states or countries. The bench pointed out that if the government insists on allocating land strictly at market value, potential investors may shift to regions that offer better incentives.
To remain competitive with neighbouring states and ensure economic growth, the State must encourage large-scale investments and industrial development, the court observed.
It also noted that a significant proportion of professionals working in the global IT sector are Telugu-speaking individuals who have settled across various parts of the country and abroad.
In this context, the government may have formulated policies relating to IT development and land allotment with the objective of transforming the State into a major IT hub.
HC: If policy succeeds benefits could be more
The court further observed that land allotment constitutes only one component of the broader government policy and that the long-term benefits arising from such initiatives may become evident over time.
The judiciary, it clarified, cannot ordinarily interfere with policy decisions of the executive unless they are shown to be arbitrary or illegal. The bench also remarked that variations in incentives extended to different companies may exist, but such differences alone cannot be a ground to stall developmental initiatives. If the policy succeeds in creating a robust IT ecosystem, the benefits could extend for generations, the court noted.
It also expressed a prima facie view that allocating land solely through public auction may not necessarily yield the desired results. In his petition, the petitioner alleged that government lands were being allotted to private firms and real estate developers at nominal prices under certain GOs and sought directions to set aside such allotments.
The court directed the State government to file its counter affidavit and ordered that the present petition be tagged along with other pending PILs challenging similar land allotments.