KCR, Harish Rao Move High Court: Challenge Kaleshwaram Commission Report as ‘Politically Motivated’
The Telangana High Court on Thursday heard the petitions filed by former Chief Minister K. Chandrashekhar Rao (KCR) and former minister Harish Rao. Both petitions were taken up together by a bench headed by the Chief Justice.
Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court on Thursday heard the petitions filed by former Chief Minister K. Chandrashekhar Rao (KCR) and former minister Harish Rao. Both petitions were taken up together by a bench headed by the Chief Justice.
Senior Supreme Court lawyer Sundaram, appearing for KCR, argued that the Kaleshwaram Commission report should be declared null and void. He contended that the commission itself was constituted for political purposes and that rules were violated while preparing the report.
Sundaram argued that neither Section 8B nor Section 8C notices were issued during the commission’s proceedings. He pointed out that the commission’s report was shared with the media without first providing it to him, which he said was a deliberate attempt to damage his reputation among the public.
He further argued that the collapse of the Medigadda Barrage pillar was due to heavy rainfall and engineering issues, not a design flaw, and alleged that there was a clear attempt to defame the BRS party through the report.
The High Court asked Advocate General Sudarshan Reddy why the report was made public. The court inquired whether the report was officially released, whether 8B notices were issued to the petitioners, and what stage the commission’s report currently stands at.
The Advocate General clarified that the report was not placed in the public domain, and only a 60-page summary was presented to the cabinet for better understanding. He said the actual report would be made public only after discussion in the Assembly.
He added that the cabinet has approved the report for discussion in the Assembly and that further action will be taken only after the debate. He requested the court not to pass any order at this stage and sought an adjournment.
The High Court then asked when the report would be presented in the Assembly and whether any action would be taken before or after its presentation. The Advocate General replied that he would provide clarification on this tomorrow or on Monday.
The court adjourned the hearing till tomorrow.
