The Supreme Court on Monday came down heavily on the Telangana government for filing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) with a delay of 1,265 days in connection with a land dispute involving 7.14 acres in Hyderabad’s upscale Banjara Hills area.
A bench comprising Justices Aravind Kumar and Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale questioned the “gross negligence” of government officials in protecting land located in one of Hyderabad’s most expensive localities.
The dispute pertains to 7.14 acres of land in Survey No.129/76 (old) and 329 (new) at Road No.12 in Banjara Hills under the Shaikpet area. A lower court had granted an injunction order in favour of an individual identified as P Seshubabu in 2011.
Delay questioned
Challenging the lower court order, the state government approached the High Court in 2012. However, the High Court upheld the lower court’s ruling in its September 29, 2021, judgment.
The Telangana government later moved the Supreme Court against the High Court order only on November 14, 2025, resulting in a delay of 1,265 days.
During the hearing, state counsel Yatharth Kansal informed the bench about the delay in filing the SLP. Reacting sharply, Justice Aravind Kumar observed that Banjara Hills was among Hyderabad’s most premium localities and questioned why officials had remained silent over such a valuable parcel of land.
“I have heard that Banjara Hills is one of the costliest areas in Hyderabad, and the wealthy reside there. Why were government officials inactive in protecting this land?” the judge asked.
The bench directed the state’s Chief Secretary to constitute a committee and conduct an inquiry into the matter.
‘Officials appear hand in glove’
The court warned the Telangana government to place complete details before it by the next date of hearing, failing which strict action would be initiated against officials concerned.
“Officials appear to be hand in glove with the respondents,” Justice Aravind Kumar remarked, expressing serious displeasure over the handling of the case.
When the state counsel sought an apology, the bench refused to entertain it.
“We do not need apologies here. Government properties must be protected. Otherwise, stringent action will follow against your officials,” the judge said.
The court further warned that it could even order a special investigation into the matter if necessary.
Responding to the observations, counsel Yatharth Kansal assured the bench that the matter would be brought to the notice of the Chief Secretary for appropriate action.
Construction on disputed land
The bench also sought details regarding the current status of the land. In response, the state counsel informed the court that the land was presently under the possession of the respondents, who had allegedly created third-party rights and undertaken constructions on the property.
The counsel told the court that he would ascertain the complete factual position and place it on record during the next hearing.
The Supreme Court then issued notices to the respondents as well as on the aspect concerning the delay in filing the SLP.
The bench granted eight weeks for filing counter-affidavits and adjourned the matter for further hearing.
Follow on Twitter | Posted by P N Sree Harsha | 
