IMPORTANT POINT
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.

ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Shri Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti)

Mr. Gandra Mohan Rao, learned Senior Counsel representing Mr. G. Malla Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Mr. Pottigari Sridhar Reddy, learned Special Government Pleader attached to the office of the learned Advocate General for the State of Telangana for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

Mr. Vedula Srinivas, learned Senior Counsel representing Mr. S. Viplav Simha Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.4.

2. This writ petition is filed praying to grant the following relief:

“… to issue appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly writ of Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the issue of G.O.Ms.No.744 General Administration (I&PR) Department dated 26.12.2008 and G.O.Ms.No.355 General Administration (I & PR-II) dated 21.08.2001 passed by the 1st respondent as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, ultra vires the provisions of the A.P. (Telangana Are) State Lands and Land Revenue Rules, 1975 and Article 14 of the Constitution of India and to set aside the same and to declare the consequential action taken pursuant to the above Government orders as illegal, non-est, null and void and to further direct investigation into allotment of the land to the 4th respondent and to fix the responsibility and to punish the guilty and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

3. Brief facts:

According to petitioner, he is a Member of Legislative Assembly and has served as a Cabinet Minister during the years 2004-2006 and that he launched agitations of public importance. It is averred that the petitioner takes up the issues which cause loss to public exchequer and issues of gross abuse and misuse of power by officers and persons.

3.1. The State Government issued G.O.Ms.No.355, General Administration (I & PR) Department, dated 21.08.2001, directing A.P. State Film, T.V. & Theatre Development Corporation Limited, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as ‘Corporation’) to allot land admeasuring an extent of Acs.5.00 in Survey No.403 of Shaikpet Village, Golconda Taluk, Hyderabad District, at the rate of Rs.8,500/- per acre to the respondent No.4 for the purpose of construction of office, godown for equipment, parking and service facilities for the generator vehicles. By letter dated 21.02.2002, further action in the matter was stopped by the Government. The subject land remained with Government, vide G.O.Ms.No.744, General Administration (I & PR-II) Department, dated 26.12.2008, earlier instructions issued on 21.02.2002 were withdrawn and respondent No.3 was directed to execute sale deed in favour of respondent No.4. The purpose of allotment in the said G.O., was changed, respondent No.4 was permitted to develop facilities for promotion of film and TV industry, such as dubbing theatres, editing rooms, graphics and animation studios and TV serials, preview theatres, satellite up-linking facilities, staying and resting facilities for film and TV industry employees, artists and technicians etc., and also to provide facilities for production companies coming from all over India and abroad and foreign collaboration productions connected to film, TV and animation software industry etc., in the allotted land. Writ petition is filed challenging G.O.Ms.No.744, dated 26.12.2008 and G.O.Ms. No.355, dated 21.08.2001, on various grounds.

4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that petitioner is a public spirited person and has obtained information under Right to Information Act, 2005 about allotments of lands to various film personalities. It is also submitted that terms and conditions of allotment are general in nature and that no project report has been called for. It is contended that the allotment is made at a throwaway price of Rs.8,500/- per acre, which is unconscionable and without obtaining approval from the Cabinet of the State Government. It is submitted that the G.Os., were issued by