Telangana High Court pulls up state government over Layout Regularisation Scheme
Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court on Thursday criticised the Telangana state government’s decision to regularise all illegal and unapproved layouts in rural and urban areas under the Layout Regularisation Scheme through Government Order (GO) 131.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Raghavendra Singh Chauhan and Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy wondered as to which law enables the state government to issue the GO for the regularisation of unauthorised and unapproved layouts.
Pointing to recent floods which hit Hyderabad and Warangal cities badly, inundating several colonies for weeks, the Chief Justice said it seems that the contention of the Telangana state government that the GO for regularisation was for the planned development is not correct. “It looks like encouraging lawlessness among the layout developers and violators,” the Chief Justice said.
Recalling that the LRS scheme was introduced once in every five or six years — like 2008, 2015 and 2020, the Chief Justice asked the Advocate General of Telangana state that how an unauthorised layout developers, builders of unapproved constructions and buyers of such plots and buildings will have the fright to not go for unapproved plots and how they will bind to the law, if the government itself approves them under the LRS and BPS schemes.
“Surveys claimed that nearly 45 per cent of Hyderabad city was submerged due to the recent torrential rains and 80 percent of water bodies disappeared in the city and full-tank levels of all lakes were mushroomed with constructions — either approved or unapproved. If you allow them under the regularisation scheme, then by 2050, the whole Hyderabad will be flooded,” the CJ commented.
Pointing out at GO 131 allows regularisation of unapproved layouts, which do not have open spaces for parks, schools and amenities, on paying extra, Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy asked the Advocate General B.S Prasad as to how will the government develop amenities in those layouts, when there was no land was provided for them.
However, the court asked an explanation from the government on the contentions raised in the PILs and directed the Advocate General to file affidavits in each PIL separately by explaining its stand.
The bench was dealing with the five PILs, which challenged GO 131. The PILs were adjourned to November 12.
