Telangana High Court Demands Government Responses on Hyderabad Civic Restructuring Challenge
In a significant legal development concerning the proposed restructuring of Hyderabad's civic administration, the Telangana High Court on Thursday sought comprehensive responses from both the state and central governments regarding a petition that challenges the division of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation into three separate municipal entities.
Court Directs Timely Submission of Counter-Affidavits
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice GM Mohiuddin issued a directive requiring the state government and the central government to file detailed counter-affidavits within a strict timeframe of three weeks. The court further granted the petitioner an additional week to submit a rejoinder to these government responses. The matter has been officially scheduled for further hearing on March 25, 2025, marking a crucial date in this ongoing legal dispute.
Petitioner's Argument: Violation of Census Freeze Provisions
The petition, filed by Hyderabad-based businessman D Gurava Reddy, presents a compelling argument that the proposed municipal reorganization directly violates a jurisdictional freeze that was imposed by the registrar general and Census commissioner of India in August 2025. This freeze was specifically implemented in preparation for the upcoming Census 2027. According to the petitioner's legal team, once such a jurisdictional freeze is officially in place for Census purposes, the state government is legally prohibited from altering municipal boundaries until the entire Census exercise has been completed.
The petitioner's counsel, Rajkumar Gummi, submitted to the court that the Census commissioner's circular explicitly covers all jurisdictional changes, including the creation of new districts, modification of town limits, and de-notification of sub-districts. Gummi specifically pointed out that the merger of twenty-seven urban local bodies into the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation and the subsequent division into three hundred wards occurred during this freeze period, which he argued extends up to December 31, 2025.
Government Order Challenged as Violating Census Requirements
The legal challenge further contends that the government order issued on February 11, 2025, which splits the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation into three commissionerates—GHMC, Cyberabad Municipal Corporation, and Malkajgiri Municipal Corporation—violates the mandatory requirement that all such jurisdictional changes must be formally communicated to the Census commissioner by January 10, 2026. This procedural violation forms a central pillar of the petitioner's argument against the municipal reorganization.
State Government's Counter-Argument on Freeze Timeline
Appearing for the state government, advocate general A Sudarshan Reddy presented a contrasting interpretation of the Census freeze timeline. He informed the court that the relevant freeze date should technically be March 1, 2026, which is exactly one year before the Census reference date of March 1, 2027. According to the state's legal position, jurisdictional changes remain permissible until this March 2026 date.
"The Census will proceed based on the administrative status as of March 1, 2027. The proposed division of municipal corporations does not nullify the change or render it illegal," argued the advocate general. He further emphasized that the reorganization does not violate any constitutional provisions and urged the court to dismiss the petition entirely.
Legal Precedent and Federal Implications Cited
The petitioner's counsel maintained a firm position that the Census commissioner had definitively fixed December 31, 2025, as the absolute cut-off date for jurisdictional changes. Referring to a legal precedent established by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, he argued that the state government's action could potentially interfere with federal Census operations and sought an immediate suspension of the municipal reorganization process.
After carefully hearing arguments from both legal sides, the division bench observed that Census operations were unlikely to be affected at this current stage of proceedings. The court subsequently adjourned the case pending the submission of the government responses, setting the stage for a more detailed examination of the legal and administrative implications of Hyderabad's proposed civic restructuring.
