Telangana High Court takes note of PIL on ongoing illegal constructions in Osmansagar-Himayatsagar Buffer Zone

The petition is filed by M Madhav Reddy, a farmer from Peddamangalaram village in Moinabad mandal

Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court has taken cognizance of yet another Public Interest Litigation (PIL) highlighting ongoing illegal constructions in the bio-conservation zone surrounding the twin reservoirs of Osmansagar and Himayatsagar.

The petition, filed by M Madhav Reddy, a farmer from Peddamangalaram village in Moinabad mandal, alleges that commercial activity—specifically the construction of new convention centers—is continuing unchecked within the 10-kilometer restricted buffer zone defined under Government Order (GO) 111.

Named among the private respondents in the case are administrators of several convention facilities, including Ananda Convention, Neo Convention, Arya Convention, KLN Utsav, and K Convention Centers. The petitioner claimed these entities were undertaking new construction projects in blatant violation of existing environmental restrictions.

Despite multiple complaints from local residents and stakeholders, the petitioner alleged that government agencies—including the Irrigation Department, Telangana Pollution Control Board, Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board (HMWSSB), Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA), Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC), and the Lake Protection Committee—have failed to act against these unauthorised developments.

The bench, comprising Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Renuka Yara, heard arguments from the petitioner’s counsel, who emphasized that multiple rulings from the Supreme Court, National Green Tribunal (NGT), and the High Court have clearly prohibited any form of construction within this ecologically sensitive zone.

The counsel further pointed out that while the previous State government had constituted a committee to review the provisions of GO 111, no formal decision was ever taken, leaving the order legally binding. Despite this, enforcement has remained lax, and agencies have allegedly ignored formal complaints, allowing violations to continue unabated.

Urging the court to intervene, the petitioner sought directions to halt illegal constructions in the affected villages and requested the appointment of an expert committee or an Advocate Commissioner to assess the extent of encroachment. Citing the Supreme Court’s proactive stance in the Kancha Gachibowli land case, the counsel pressed for similar urgency to protect the twin reservoirs—critical sources of drinking water for Hyderabad and part of its green belt.

Following the preliminary hearing, the bench directed the court registry to allot a regular case number to the PIL and issued notices to all government departments and private parties involved, seeking their responses. The matter has been adjourned for further hearing.