Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K.LAKSHMAN, K.SUJANA
Koti Raghunatha Rao – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. pil challenges on government orders (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioners' concerns on land allocation (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's jurisdiction on government policies (Para 6 , 20) |
| 4. court emphasizes restrictions on arbitrary exercise of government discretion. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 24) |
| 5. criteria for valid land allotment (Para 30 , 32) |
| 6. financial aid and land allotment decisions should align with established public policy and legal standards. (Para 39 , 41) |
| 7. government support for arbitration institutions (Para 46 , 47 , 48) |
| 8. court's verdict on government orders (Para 52) |
COMMON ORDER:
(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.Lakshman)
The present public interest litigations (hereinafter ‘PILs’) are filed challenging three government orders viz., G.O. Ms. No. 126 dated 26.12.2021 whereby the Government of Telangana (Respondent No. 1) allotted land bearing Plot No. 27 admeasuring Ac. 3.70 in Sy. No. 83/1, Raidurg village, Sherilingampally mandal, R.R. District (hereinafter ‘subject land’) in favour of the International Arbitration & Mediation Centre (hereinafter ‘IAMC’); G.O. Ms. No. 76 dated 12.11.2021 and G.O. Ms. No. 365 dated 16.07.2022 whereby Respondent No. 1 granted financial aid of
Government land allotments must comply with statutory regulations, ensuring fairness and transparency in public interest; arbitrary allotments without adherence to law are unconstitutional.
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 State must ensure fair and transparent policies in public property dealings, adhering to constitutional mandates, while judicial review of policy decisions is limited to cases of arbitrariness or....
Process of applying the pick and choose policy and making allotments at the whims and fancies of the persons in power continued in the State.
The court ruled that preferential land allotment policies favoring certain privileged groups violate Article 14 of the Constitution, undermining equality and public interest.
The court emphasized the need for local authorities' input in land allotment decisions to ensure compliance with community needs and statutory obligations.
Spectrum is a natural resource which belongs to people, and State, its instrumentalities or licensee, as case may be, who deal with same, hold it on behalf of people are accountability to people. Sim....
Point of Law : Power vested by State in a public authority should be viewed as a trust coupled with duty to be exercised in larger public and social interest. Power is to be exercised strictly adheri....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
