GO 111: HC hauls up Telangana for 5-year delay in protecting reservoirs

Hyderabad: The Telangana high court on Wednesday came down heavily on the state government for nearly five-year delay in deciding implementation of GO 111 to protect and define catchment areas of the twin reservoirs, Himayatsagar and Osmansagar, spread over 84 villages.
Warning that it would disband the high-power committee headed by chief secretary Somesh Kumar which had done little in the past five years, the HC gave state time till August 16 to explain its stand.

The bench of Chief Justice Hima Kohli and Justice B Vijaysen Reddy was hearing a batch of petitions filed by environmentalist S Jeevanand Reddy and others seeking strict implementation of GO 111 to protect the catchment areas of twin reservoirs.
There were some more petitions questioning the validity of GO 111 on the grounds that it hindered the development of the 84 villages as it banned construction in the catchment areas. While a few more pleas sought deletion of their areas from the purview of GO 111 as the state-appointed research agencies themselves had deemed them to be outside the catchment purview.
Five years ago, the state government had said it would appoint an experts committee to assess GO 111 relevance as water needs of Hyderabad and its vicinity were being met by Krishna and Godavari and not the twin reservoirs. And in response to a plea before the NGT, the state had initially planned the committee with a team of professors and hydrologists. But subsequently in 2016 it set up a four-member IAS committee with a 45-day deadline that was extended to six months. Now, even after four and a half years later, the IAS committee has neither made any progress nor given any recommendations, the petitioners said.
The four-member committee in effect is a team of three now. Chief secretary Somesh is the chairman of this committee. As the principal secretary revenue is a member of this committee, and Somesh is holding that post too, he is also a member. Principal Secretary Arvind Kumar of municipal administration and water board MD Dana Kishore are two other members.
In Wednesday’s lengthy hearing, the bench shot of a series of questions to state counsel A Sanjiv Kumar.
“Whenever an officer retires or is transferred out, the composition of the committee changes. Nothing else changes. Explain why such a defunct committee should not be disbanded? We are inclined to close it,” the bench said.
When Kumar claimed that the committed had met 28 times so far and has been meeting experts, the bench summoned the record of minutes of these meetings along with the entire data pertaining to the issue.