UJJAL BHUYAN, B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
Urmila Pingle – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
ORDER :
UJJAL BHUYAN, J.
Heard Mr. D.Prakash Reddy, learned Senior Counsel representing Mr. Mohammed Omer Farooq, learned counsel for the petitioners; Mr. B.S.Prasad, learned Advocate General for the State of Telangana for the State respondents; and Mr. S.Niranjan Reddy, learned Senior Counsel representing Ms. Rubaina S. Khatoon, learned counsel for respondents No.10, 11 and 12.
2. This public interest litigation (PIL) has been filed assailing the legality and validity of G.O.Ms.No.59 dated 22.03.2018 of the Revenue (Assignment-II) Department, Government of Telangana as well as Memo dated 02.08.2018 issued by the Special Chief Secretary to Government of Telangana, Revenue (Assignment-II) Department.
3. By G.O.Ms.No.59 dated 22.03.2018, Government of Telangana decided to allot government land to an extent of Acs.15.00 situated in Survey No.41/14/2 of Khanamet Village, Serilingampally Mandal in Ranga Reddy District in favour of M/s.Sai Sindhu Foundation i.e., respondent No.10, which would also be referred as Sai Sindhu Foundation, for construction of hospital for cancer and other lif
Akhil Bhartiya Upbhokta Congress v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Goa Foundation v. Sesa Sterlite Ltd.
Humanity v. State of West Bengal
Hazi T.M.Hassan Rawther v. Kerala Financial Corporation
Kumari Shrilekha Vidyardhi v. State of Uttar Pradesh
New India Public School v. HUDA
Natural Resources Allocation, in Re: Special Reference
Meerut Development Authority v. Association of Management Studies
Centre for Public Interest Litigation v. Union of India
Institute of Law, Chandigarh v. Neeraj Sharma
Sachidanand Pandey v. State of West Bengal
Usha Mehta v. Government of Andhra Pradesh
J.S. Luthra Academy v. State of J&K
Kasturi Lal Lakshmi Reddy v. State of Jammu & Kashmir
M.P Oil Extraction v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Pathan Mohammed Suleman Rehmatkhan v. State of Gujarat
Odisha IIDC Ltd. v. Pitabasa Mishra
The court upheld the government's policy for land allotment to promote the film industry, emphasizing compliance with Article 14 and the importance of transparency in public contracts.
The court affirmed the authority of the state to make land allocations at concessional rates for public interest educational purposes, emphasizing judicial restraint in reviewing policy decisions.
Government land allotments must comply with statutory regulations, ensuring fairness and transparency in public interest; arbitrary allotments without adherence to law are unconstitutional.
(1) Distribution of State-owned assets – Government cannot distribute State’s largesse and normally State must get maximum value of resources, especially when State-owned assets are passed over to pr....
The court emphasized the need for local authorities' input in land allotment decisions to ensure compliance with community needs and statutory obligations.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.