Ward population figures must go public, HC directs GHMC

Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court single bench of Justice Bollam Vijaysen Reddy on Wednesday refused to grant any interim relief in a writ petition challenging the delimitation preliminary notification dated December 9 issued by the GHMC commissioner. However, the court issued a significant direction to the commissioner to place ward-wise population details along with authenticated ward-wise maps in public domain within 24 hours.

The court observed that upon publication of the ward-wise population data, the petitioners would be entitled to submit objections or additional objections, if any, within two days thereafter. The directions were issued to ensure transparency in the delimitation exercise and to enable affected citizens to meaningfully exercise their right to object.

The petition was filed by Ponna Venkat Ramana of Padmavathi Nilayam, Aliyabad, seeking a stay of the preliminary notification on the ground that objections submitted by the residents had not been considered by the GHMC commissioner.

The petitioner specifically challenged the delimitation of ward 104, as published in the Telangana Gazette Notification No. 717 dated December 9, 2025, contending that the process violated the Telangana Municipal Corporations (Delimitation of Wards) Rules, 1996, and the GHMC Act. During the hearing, Advocate-General A Sudarshan Reddy informed the court that the decision to proceed with the GHMC delimitation of wards was not taken hastily or overnight. The exercise was undertaken after considering all relevant aspects and was part of a comprehensive process initiated by the government. He stated that the delimitation would benefit people, particularly in view of the expansion of municipal limits to include areas falling within the Outer Ring Road.

The A-G apprised the court that each objection received had been assigned a unique identification number; as of December 17, a total of 3,102 objections had been received. He assured that all objections would be duly examined and replied to by authorities.

Countering the submissions, senior counsel J Prabhakar, appearing for the petitioner, contended that his objections had not been considered at all. He questioned the basis on which the delimitation exercise was carried out, pointing out that the government had failed to disclose ward-wise population figures in public domain, thereby depriving citizens of the opportunity to raise informed objections.

After hearing the parties, the court declined to stay the preliminary notification, but emphasised the need for transparency and public access to population data, leading to its directive to the GHMC Commissioner to immediately upload the relevant details for public scrutiny.