HYDERABAD: The state government told the Telangana High Court on Tuesday that the Justice PC Ghose Commission, set up to examine alleged lapses in the Kaleshwaram irrigation project, had prepared its report solely on the basis of official records.
Advocate General A Sudarshan Reddy informed the bench that the panel relied on documents furnished by the state and Union governments, along with inputs from statutory bodies such as the National Dam Safety Authority (NDSA) and the Central Water Commission (CWC).
He stressed that the commission did not record statements from individuals and that its conclusions were drawn entirely from documentary material.
The submissions were made before Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice GM Mohiuddin while responding to petitions challenging the commission’s findings.
Former Chief Minister K Chandrasekhar Rao has sought to have the report scrapped. Similar pleas have been moved by former minister and MLA T Harish Rao, senior IAS officer Smita Sabharwal and former chief secretary Shailendra Kumar Joshi.
After noting the government’s stand, the court instructed the state to complete its replies in all related petitions by 2.45 pm on Thursday. The petitioners will then file their responses, enabling the court to hear final arguments from all sides the same day. The bench indicated that orders are likely to be reserved once submissions conclude.
Defending the constitution of the panel, the AG cited judicial precedents, including a Supreme Court judgment concerning an inquiry commission in Odisha during the 1960s and an Andhra Pradesh High Court ruling related to the Yeleru canal land acquisition issue of the 1990s.
He maintained that the state was legally empowered to appoint a commission to investigate matters of public concern, especially a large-scale project like Kaleshwaram, which was intended to irrigate nearly 19 lakh acres and cater to industrial and drinking water needs.
Addressing objections to the terms of reference, the AG argued that they could not be described as biased or predetermined. He clarified that although the probe was described as a “judicial inquiry” because it was chaired by a retired judge, it functioned strictly under the Commissions of Inquiry Act and within the statutory limits laid down by law.
The government also pointed to remarks made by oversight institutions, including the NDSA, an expert committee and the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), which highlighted concerns regarding various aspects of the project.
The AG specifically referred to the release of `2,951 crore for the Medigadda barrage, stating that the funds were sanctioned without clearance from a Cabinet sub-committee and were approved by the then chief minister and the former Irrigation department principal secretary.
Chief Justice Singh advised counsel on both sides to avoid protracted submissions and adhere to the scheduled time slot between 12.15 pm and 2.45 pm on Thursday. Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the government along with the AG, presented arguments during the hearing.