Telangana HC defers Kaleshwaram case verdict to April 22

The report reportedly attributed responsibility to KCR for irregularities and made adverse observations against Harish Rao, Joshi and Sabharwal.
Telangana High Court.
Telangana High Court. (File photo | Express)
Updated on
2 min read

HYDERABAD: The Telangana High Court on Wednesday deferred pronouncement of judgment to April 22 in a batch of writ petitions filed by former chief minister K Chandrasekhar Rao and three others seeking to quash the report of the Justice PC Ghose Commission on alleged irregularities in the Kaleshwaram Lift Irrigation Scheme.

The petitions were also filed by former minister T Harish Rao, former chief secretary SK Joshi, and senior IAS officer Smitha Sabharwal, challenging the Commission’s findings.

A bench of Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice GM Mohiuddin had earlier reserved judgment after hearing arguments. The verdict, expected on Wednesday, was deferred as it was not ready.

The bench also extended interim protection, directing that no coercive steps be taken against the four petitioners based on the Commission’s findings until the next hearing.

Senior counsel Dama Sheshadri Naidu appeared for KCR, while A Sudershan Reddy and senior counsel S Niranjan Reddy represented the state government and the Commission, respectively.

The dispute relates to the Kaleshwaram Lift Irrigation Scheme, a multi-stage irrigation project initiated in 2016 during the BRS government and inaugurated in phases, with its main component launched in 2019.

In March 2024, the state government constituted a probe panel headed by former Supreme Court judge PC Ghose to examine alleged lapses in the planning, design, execution, and maintenance of the Medigadda, Annaram, and Sundilla barrages. The Commission submitted its report on July 31, 2025.

The report reportedly attributed responsibility to KCR for irregularities and made adverse observations against Harish Rao, Joshi and Sabharwal.

During hearings, counsel for the petitioners argued that the findings were unsustainable and that mandatory safeguards under Sections 8B and 8C of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 were not followed, stating that their clients were not issued proper notices before being indicted.

The matter will be taken up on April 22 for pronouncement of judgment.

Related Stories

No stories found.

X
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com