HYDERABAD: The Telangana High Court has directed the state government to cancel land allotments made to industries that have not initiated construction or taken steps to establish businesses.
The order was issued by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J Sreenivas while hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the Campaign for Housing and Tenural Rights (CHATRI), represented by its secretary S Jeevan Kumar.
The court specifically named several companies, including M/s Indu Techzone Private Limited, M/s Brahmani Infratech Private Limited, M/s Stargaze Properties Private Limited, M/s Anantha Technologies Limited, and M/s JT Holdings Private Limited, as respondents and ordered cancellation of land allotments to them if they failed to initiate operations. The state government was given a period of four months to implement the order.
The PIL argued that public resources, such as land, must be used for the benefit of the people, not concentrated in the hands of a few. The petitioners contended that the Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation (APIIC) had allotted large tracts of land in and around Hyderabad and other parts of undivided Andhra Pradesh to private companies at nominal prices without public tender or auction, in violation of constitutional principles.
According to the petitioners, over 4,156 acres of land was allotted between 2001 and 2006 by the APIIC on a nomination basis without public auction, raising concerns about transparency and the loss of public resources.
The petitioners cited a response to a Right to Information (RTI) request, which confirmed that the land allotments were made without a competitive bidding process.
The state revenue department, defending the allotments, stated that at the time, the demand for industrial land was low, and allotments were made to encourage industrial growth.
They argued that the procedure was based on the requirements of entrepreneurs and that auctioning land was introduced only when demand exceeded supply.
However, the court emphasised that the state, as the custodian of public resources, has a responsibility to ensure that these resources are used for the public good and not concentrated in the hands of a few entities.
It ordered the state government to take action against the companies that have failed to develop the allotted land and to prioritise public interest in future land transactions.