HC seeks detailed status of heritage clearances for Hyderabad Metro Phase-II
HYDERABAD: The Telangana High Court on Wednesday directed the state government and the Hyderabad Airport Metro Limited (HAML) to file detailed affidavits explaining the status of statutory permissions and construction activities in relation to heritage structures along the proposed Phase-II of the Hyderabad Metro Rail Project.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice GM Mohiuddin passed the directions while hearing a PIL concerning the impact of the Phase-II metro alignment on protected and other heritage structures.
During the hearing, HAML made a short PowerPoint presentation on the proposed seven-km metro corridor under Phase-II, explaining that heritage structures protected under the Telangana Heritage (Protection, Preservation, Conservation and Maintenance) Act, 2017 would not be adversely affected by the project.
According to the respondents — the state and others — the Phase-II alignment passes through areas where three notified heritage structures are located, one classified as Grade-I, and two as Grade-III under the 2017 Act. It was also acknowledged that several other structures, though not officially notified as heritage, exist along the proposed route.
The petitioners, Act Public Welfare Foundation (APWF), an NGO, along with advocate Mohammed Omer, contended that excavation and construction activities were being carried out without obtaining prior approval from the Conservation Committee and without supervision by the Director, Department of Heritage, as mandated by the Act.
They alleged that such activities were affecting heritage structures as well as their precincts and were undertaken without a detailed heritage impact assessment or requisite statutory clearances.
Taking note of the rival submissions, the bench directed the state government and the Corporation to file affidavits detailing: the stage of processing of applications seeking permission to undertake construction activities at locations where heritage structures fall along or near the metro alignment; the current status of any construction or excavation activities affecting heritage structures or their precincts; and whether the Conservation Committee under the 2017 Act has been constituted and is fully functional.
The court specifically ordered that the affidavits be filed in spreadsheet format, clearly disclosing the details.
During the previous hearing, the bench had asked both HAML and the petitioners to explain their respective positions through PowerPoint presentations to assist the court in understanding the technical and heritage-related concerns surrounding the Phase-II metro project.
The matter has been posted for further hearing on March 3.