GHMC pledges to retain greenery in Indira Park

The corporation has already given a specific undertaking to translocate the trees and repair damaged tennis courts in the area where a steel bridge has been proposed, it added.

Workers at Indira Park in Hyderabad. (File photo| Vinay Madapu, EPS)

HYDERABAD: The Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) told the Telangana High Court that it is not misusing the Indira Park land, and is using it for public use only, and will take all steps to maintain the greenery and the tennis courts without causing inconvenience to regular walkers and persons who are availing these facilities. The corporation has already given a specific undertaking to translocate the trees and repair damaged tennis courts in the area where a steel bridge has been proposed, it added.

In this regard, standing counsel for GHMC Pasham Krishna Reddy recently made this submission before Justice Challa Kodanda Ram dealing with a petition filed by Dr AT Raghavender and 101 other residents of the city seeking direction to the authorities concerned not to damage/convert/transfer the Indira Park land, chop trees, or dismantle tennis courts for purpose of road widening or any other purpose, contrary to provisions of GHMC Act.

The government recently laid the foundation for construction of a 2.6 km four-lane elevated corridor (steel bridge) from Indira Park to VST costing about `350 crore under the Strategic Road Development Programme (SRDP). The GHMC, in its counter affidavit, also stated that it will establish a third tennis court in the same locality within a period of five months. “If the bridge is shifted to the other side, several private properties will be affected and the cost of construction will increase by paying compensation in the form of land acquisition. The GHMC will take all steps to maintain the greenery and the courts without inconvenience to regular walkers and persons who are availing these facilities,” noted the affidavit.

After recording the undertaking by GHMC, Justice Kodanda Ram said there is no requirement for the court to adjudicate the matter as the petitioners have no objection for disposal of the case. The judge made it clear that the corporation should adhere to its commitment made in the counter affidavit in letter and spirit.