Listen to the article
Telangana IT Minister Rebuts BRS’s ₹5 Lakh Crore Land Conversion “Scam” Allegations
In a pointed rebuttal to accusations made by Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) working president KT Rama Rao, Telangana Industries and IT Minister Duddilla Sridhar Babu on Friday dismissed claims of a massive financial impropriety in the state’s industrial land conversion policy.
During a press conference at the Secretariat, Sridhar Babu characterized KTR’s allegations of a “₹5 lakh crore scam” as “malicious propaganda” designed to mislead the public through deliberate distortion of facts.
“Was your government not the one that issued GO Ms. 19, 20 and 21 on August 29, 2023, giving freehold rights in Ameerpet, Kukatpally and Hafeezpet?” Sridhar Babu questioned, highlighting what he described as hypocrisy in the BRS’s stance given their own actions just months before the 2023 elections.
The minister provided clarification on the disputed land figures, noting that while 9,292 acres are frequently mentioned in public discourse, only 4,740 acres had actually been allocated to industrial enterprises after proper planning. The remaining acreage, he explained, has been utilized for critical infrastructure development including roads and drainage networks.
“These allocations were made over several decades, not in one stroke, and were part of the state’s long-term industrial development strategy,” Sridhar Babu emphasized.
The controversy centers around the Congress-led government’s recent policy decision to allow conversion of industrial lands for other uses with impact fees set at 30 and 50 percent rates, as approved by the Cabinet on November 17. This policy provides landowners an option, not an obligation, for land-use conversion.
Sridhar Babu suggested that KTR’s heightened criticism stems from political frustration following the Congress party’s recent victory in the Jubilee Hills by-election. “The BRS had misled its own cadre by projecting an impending win and is now attempting to deflect attention through unfounded claims,” he stated.
In a sharp counterattack, the minister alleged that if any land irregularities occurred, they happened during the BRS administration, which he claimed had forced industries to pay 100 percent of registration value for ownership rights, and 200 percent if land ownership had changed hands.
“They must explain how they granted ownership rights over properties that had already been transferred earlier,” he challenged, contrasting this with the current policy that permits only legitimate titleholders to apply for conversion.
Addressing allegations that members of Chief Minister Revanth Reddy’s family had signed land agreements, Sridhar Babu flatly denied these claims. “None of them holds any government position. A person who served as minister for ten years making such wild allegations is unacceptable. If he has proof, let him produce it—the government will act immediately.”
The minister projected that the impact fee initiative would generate approximately ₹4,000 to ₹5,000 crore in revenue, though this depends entirely on eligible landowners choosing to apply for conversion. He emphasized that those without proper ownership documentation would be ineligible under any circumstances.
Sridhar Babu outlined the administration’s broader vision for industrial development, noting plans to gradually relocate industrial units operating within the Outer Ring Road (ORR) to peripheral areas to reduce urban pollution. He acknowledged the challenges Telangana faces in industrial development compared to other states that offer land at nominal rates with substantial tax holidays.
“We are committed to transforming Hyderabad into a global city,” he affirmed, while inviting constructive opposition but cautioning against what he termed “misleading campaigns and intimidation tactics.”
The dispute highlights escalating tensions between the ruling Congress and opposition BRS as both parties maneuver for political advantage in Telangana’s complex industrial and land-use policy landscape.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
9 Comments
While the minister’s response raises some valid points, I’m still not fully convinced that there aren’t any issues with the land conversion policies. Given the large sums of money involved, it’s reasonable to expect a high level of transparency and scrutiny. I hope more details will emerge to shed light on the situation.
The minister’s rebuttal of the ‘malicious propaganda’ claims is thought-provoking. I’d be interested to see if there is any credible evidence to support the allegations of a major financial impropriety. These types of political disputes often involve a lot of posturing, so it’s important to try to cut through that.
This is a complex issue involving competing political narratives. I think it’s important to try to look at the facts objectively rather than getting drawn into partisan rhetoric. Both sides seem to have their own agendas, so I’d encourage looking for impartial sources to get a clearer understanding.
This seems like a classic case of political finger-pointing. I’m curious to know if there are any independent watchdog organizations or journalists investigating the land conversion policies in Telangana. It would be helpful to get a more objective assessment of the situation.
I’m curious to learn more about the details of this alleged ₹5 lakh crore ‘scam’. The minister’s response about the actual acreage allocated versus what’s being discussed publicly is interesting. It would be good to see an independent analysis of the land conversion policies and figures.
This seems like a political spat over land conversion policies. It would be helpful to have more context on the specifics of the land allocations and whether there were any irregularities in the process. Both sides appear to be making claims, so it’s important to try to understand the full picture.
This seems like a highly politicized issue, and it’s important to try to cut through the rhetoric and focus on the facts. I’d encourage looking to reputable, non-partisan sources to try to get a clearer understanding of the land conversion policies and any potential irregularities.
The minister’s clarification on the actual acreage allocated is interesting, but I’d want to see the data verified by a neutral third party before drawing any conclusions. These types of disputes often involve a lot of obfuscation and selective presentation of information.
I appreciate the minister’s attempt to provide some additional context, but I’m still left with a lot of unanswered questions. Given the scale of the alleged ‘scam’, I think it’s important that there be a thorough, independent investigation to get to the bottom of this.