A division bench issued the stay orders on a PIL petition filed by a retired professor, A Vinayak Reddy, challenging the GO.
The Telangana High Court on Wednesday, 28 June, stayed the state GO (Government Order) No. 47 issued on 30 June, 2021, allotting five acres of land each to Kamma and Velama caste associations.
A division bench of the high court, comprising Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice N Tukaramji, issued the stay orders on a PIL petition filed by a retired professor, A Vinayak Reddy, challenging the GO.
The court asked the caste associations not to construct any buildings on the lands in question.
The court said that the stay orders would be in operation until it disposed of the case; it adjourned the hearing to 2 August.
The court, while taking objection to the allotment of lands to caste associations, sought to know the justification.
It said that land could be allotted to the poor, SCs, and STs, but there was no rationale in providing land free of cost to dominant caste groups. The court held that allotment of lands to caste groups was against the orders issued in the past by the Supreme Court.
The court, describing the allotment of land to dominant caste groups as a kind of encroachment, wanted to know if the government was contemplating to go on allotting land to all caste groups.
The court recalled striking down the government orders issued on 5 June, allotting the land on a lease basis to Sai Sindhu Foundation even though it was at a concessional price. The government issued GO No. 59 in 2018 allotting the land to the foundation.
The court had taken exception to the allotment of 15 acres of land in Khanament in the Rangareddy district to Sai Sindhu Foundation of which BRS Rajya Sabha member and Hetero Group chairman B Parthasarathy Reddy is the managing trustee.
It reminded the government that it had to act as the custodian of the state’s resources and could use them in the public interest, adding that the government could not go on allotting lands to those who happen to be in its good books.
The court had said that allotment of land to the Sai Sindhu Foundation was not only unreasonable but also unconstitutional and ran in conflict with the government’s policy.