HC slaps notices on state govt, Centre on HILTP

Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court on Friday issued notices to the state and Union governments on the controversial Hyderabad Industrial Land Transformation Policy (HILTP) and directed the state government to file a detailed counter affidavit confirming the Advocate General’s statement made in the court on record.

Challenging the state government’s Order No. 27 on HILTP, retired Prof K Purushotham Reddy filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the High Court. As per the GO, the state government permitted industrial lands for conversion into residential, commercial and mixed-use zones. Dr KA Paul, president of Praja Shanthi Party, also filed a PIL on the issue.

Prof Purushotham Reddy, who is also an environmentalist, said in the petition that this move would create a public health disaster as schools, hospitals and residential apartments would be permitted in the heavily polluted industrial estates like Jeedimetla, Patancheru and Pashamylaram. Ground water, air and soil pollution have already been documented in these areas for decades.

The Government Order on HILTP allowed large scale residential development without any environmental impact assessment. The conversion of nearly 9,300 acres was being permitted with no clearance from the Ministry of Environment, he argued.

Further, the current Government Order contradicted the order issued in 2013 which mandated shifting polluting industries beyond Outer Ring Road, besides violating HMDA zoning norms. The current Government Order also lacked criteria for conversion of lands and imposed a very low conversion fee of 30 per cent to 50 per cent of SRO value, he pointed out. Representing the state government, the Advocate General assured that no conversion would take place until all industries were shifted out. Relocation of the units was the primary intention of the policy, he said.

Also, the 2013 prohibition on permitting land use conversion before shifting industries would not be diluted, he stressed.

“Any change in land use will strictly follow HMDA master plan amendment procedures, including issuing notifications and calling for public objections,” the Advocate General told the court. After hearing the arguments of both parties, the High Court directed the state government to file a counter affidavit on the Advocate General’s statement on record. The next hearing on the issue is posted for December 29.