HMR denies buzz on HC stay order on Old City Metro rail
Hyderabad: NVS Reddy, Managing Director of Hyderabad Metro Rail Limited and Hyderabad Airport Metro Ltd (HAML), on Friday affirmed that the High Court has not issued any stay order regarding the ongoing metro rail works in the Old City. Reddy refuted circulating reports, stating they are factually incorrect and misleading, and confirmed that no such stay order had been granted by the High Court.
He explained that the demolition of affected structures is proceeding at a good pace, with property owners receiving attractive compensation packages, mostly as consent awards. NVS Reddy further elaborated that in a counter affidavit previously filed in response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) by Act Public Welfare Foundation (APWF), HAML had submitted to the High Court that no heritage structure was being touched or demolished in the Old City, and that the Metro Rail alignment was situated far from the Charminar Falaknuma precincts.
On behalf of HAML, Additional Advocate General Imran Khan provided an assurance to the High Court that no heritage structure would be touched or demolished. NVS Reddy also praised the enthusiastic participation of Old City residents, who are pleased with the progress of demolitions, debris clearance, and the prospect of an early commencement of the long awaited Metro Rail works in the Old City.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
6 hours ago
- The Hindu
Activists call for strict measures so that green lung spaces can breathe effectively
In the wake of shrinking urban green spaces, activists have called for a proper identification, mapping and fencing of the areas earmarked for parks and Open Space Reservation land so that they are used for public purposes. They stressed the need to place information boards regarding the purpose of the lands in order to protect these and ensure it was used only for public purposes. If these spaces were left unguarded, then the land could be encroached upon or the land could turn into dumping yards, they said. Advocate R. Karunanidhi said as per Rules, the land developers should earmark 10% of the total extent as 'Open Space Reservation' land to be used for public purposes such as public parks and playgrounds. In March, four residents of Ponmani Garden North in Uthangudi in Madurai had filed a public interest litigation petition before the High Court seeking to restrain authorities from putting up any construction on the space earmarked for a park. The residents said the land in survey numbers under Uthangudi village was formed into a layout and it was approved by the authorities. The area that was specifically earmarked for a park was intended for recreational use of the residents. The park was used by the public, particularly by children for playing, and by elderly citizens for walking and relaxation. Under these circumstances, the residents said Corporation authorities had undertaken construction activities for a proposed pumping station. The residents said the loss of a dedicated public park will severely impact the quality of life in the locality and deprive them of an essential community space. The court ordered the status quo be maintained. After the Corporation told the court that the place earmarked for the park has not been used for any other purpose, the petition was closed. The High Court has been hearing a number of such petitions to restrain the authorities from using lands earmarked for parks for any other purposes. The court also directed the authorities to take necessary steps to maintain these parks. The Tamil Nadu Parks, Play-fields and Open space (Preservation and Regulation) Act, 1959 was enacted in the interest of the public to preserve and regulate parks, play-fields and open spaces, the court had observed. In January, to a query raised at the Madurai Corporation Council meeting with regard to the open space reservation and the space allocated for parks, the authorities said a zone wise list/maps earmarking such spaces was prepared. However, AIADMK Councillor Solairaja said they were yet to get such a list. In Dindigul, CPI (M) Councillor S. Ganesan alleged that a prime land in R.M. Colony earmarked as a children's playground has been encroached upon. He pointed out that as per records the land was earmarked as a children's playground at the time of formation of housing plot. He said the land was encroached upon by influential people. Though this was brought to the notice of the authorities, appropriate steps have not been taken to remove the encroachment so far, he said, adding that he had also served notices to the authorities. He said he will be filing a public interest litigation petition before the High Court in this regard. He pointed out that not just in R.M. Colony in the district, but in several places such spaces had been encroached upon. Offering a solution to prevent such incidents, he said there should be regular monitoring of such lands. The authorities should fence the land and place boards with information for the purpose it is intended to be used, he said. Activist V. P. Manikandan of Madurai said if necessary monitoring steps were not taken, such open spaces would turn into parking lots, waste dumping yards and also could be encroached upon. He added that awareness was required. While precautionary measures have been suggested by activists, the district administrations are doing their bit to improve green spaces in the respective districts. Madurai Corporation officials said sapling planting drives have been initiated to improve the urban lung spaces. In Dindigul, a cleanliness drive has been initiated and the authorities inspected the maintenance work being carried out in a park in R.M. Colony. Similarly, in Thoothukudi district, the Corporation had launched a green initiative through sapling plantation drives and park restoration works. Waste materials and invasive species were being removed as part of the initiative. The District Legal Services Authorities in Madurai, Dindigul, Theni, Ramanathapuram and Sivaganga have also undertook mega sapling plantation drives and awareness programmes recently. Recently, Sivaganga District Collector Asha Ajith's initiative to clean up water bodies and plant saplings around them has been getting huge response from philanthropists thus showing that people are concerned about preserving the eco-system. A senior official in Sivaganga said that governments alone cannot achieve results. With public participation, not only water bodies, but every single public place - be it in residential or commercial locations - can bring about a substantial change in preserving the environment.
The Wire
7 hours ago
- The Wire
Elderly YSRCP Worker Run Over by Jagan Reddy's Car During Rally
New Delhi: An elderly man was run over by the convoy of former Andhra Pradesh chief minister Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy during a rally near Eturukur village on the outskirts of Guntur city last week. The incident came to light on Sunday after several videos surfaced on social media, showing that it was Reddy's car that crushed 65-year-old Cheeli Singaiah, a YSR Congress Party worker, to death. According to the Times of India, the rally carried on with people unaware that Singaiah had been crushed under Reddy's vehicle. Jagan was enroute from Rentapalla village in the Sattenapalli constituency to console the family of a party worker who had died by suicide last year. A massive crowd was following the convoy when the incident took place. According to reports, Singaiah had approached the vehicle to shower flowers on Reddy. As the police struggled to manage the crowd, Singaiah was reportedly pushed down in the chaos. While those near the elderly activist raised alarm on realising what had happened, Reddy's security personnel and driver did not stop the vehicle. Singaiah was later rushed to the hospital. However, doctors declared him dead on arrival. According to the Times of India, YSRCP leaders have given a cheque of Rs 10 lakh as ex gratia from the party to Singaiah's family.
Indian Express
14 hours ago
- Indian Express
Punjab & Haryana HC terms shifting of RERA HQ to Dharamshala ‘mala fide', slaps Rs 5L fine on govt
Reacting sharply to the state government for shifting the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA)'s headquarters from Shimla to Dharamshala, a division bench of Himachal Pradesh High Court Chief Justice GS Sandhawalia and Justice Ranjan Sharma on Friday termed the move 'mala fide' and slapped a penalty of Rs 5 lakh for failing to appoint the authority's chairman and members despite the necessary process being completed two months ago. The bench also directed, the detailed order released on Saturday, that Chief Secretary Prabodh Saxena should 'come present on June 25 if the necessary notifications about the appointments of RERA chairman and members were not issued'. The court directions came during the resumed hearing on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by one Atul Sharma, challenging the extension of Saxena's tenure 'on multiple grounds and the delay in appointing the RERA chairman as well as members'. The order reads, 'It is also to be noticed that in the interim period, after the recommendation sent, the office of RERA has been relocated to Dharamshala on June 13 without even identifying the alternative office place. We are also of the prima facie opinion that the whole purpose of dragging the appointments and shifting the HQ of RERA is with a mala fide purpose, and at this stage, we do not wish to say anything more.' The order further states, 'Necessary notifications shall also be issued regarding the appointments by the said date (June 25), failing which the Chief Secretary shall come present on the said date.' The division bench also reprimanded the state government for dragging its feet in notifying the appointments of the chairperson and members of the HP RERA. The court, while hearing the matter on Friday, observed that the authorities failed to act despite prior directions and imposed a cost of Rs 5,00,000 on the state government for its inaction. The order states, 'The matter was first listed on May 9 when it was brought to the court's attention that respondent No. 3 (Chief Secretary) had applied for the post of Chairperson of HP RERA. During the same hearing, the bench noted that the Registrar General of the High Court had forwarded the recommendations for appointments to the state government on March 13. Despite this, no official notification regarding the appointments had been issued. The court had also taken judicial notice of the numerous representations it received, expressing concern over the prolonged delay in filling these key regulatory positions.' Among the representations placed on record was a letter dated April 16, 2025, from one Sunil Kumar, highlighting the state's inaction. The matter was then adjourned to May 15, with the court directing the Secretary to file an affidavit in light of Rule 18(5) of the Himachal Pradesh Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017, which mandates the selection process be completed in a time-bound manner. On May 26, the court recorded that the affidavit dated May 15, 2025, filed by the Secretary, admitted the state government's obligation to appoint the chairperson and members. However, it was stated that the RERA office had been relocated to Dharamshala, District Kangra, in accordance with a broader policy decision. During the last hearing on June 20, the state government informed the court through a status report that only one member— Vidur Mehta — had been appointed via notification dated June 19, 2025. An affidavit filed on the same date stated that the appointment process for the remaining members and the chairperson was still under consideration. Taking a dim view of the situation, the court observed, 'The above sequence of events shows that the State Government is deliberately delaying the notification of appointments, despite recommendations being made over three months ago.' Consequently, the court imposed a penalty of Rs 5 lakh on the state government, directing that it be deposited in the Registry by June 25, 2025. The bench also ordered that the necessary appointment notifications be issued by the same date. In the event of non-compliance, the Chief Secretary has been directed to appear in person before the court. Senior advocate Peeyush Sharma, representing the petitioner, had told The Indian Express, 'The division bench has firmly instructed the state government to file its replies by June 25. Although the government informed the bench that a HPRERA member was appointed yesterday (Thursday), the bench questioned why the statutory body's chairperson had not been appointed yet, despite the selection committee, headed by the Chief Justice, High Court, already clearing the name.'
