The Supreme Court on Monday nullified the preferential allotment of land to judges, lawmakers, bureaucrats, police officers, and journalists in Telangana. The bench ruled that such policies violated the constitutional right to equality and described them as arbitrary. Highlighting the misuse of public resources, the court emphasized that state largesse to privileged groups deprives the marginalized and socially disadvantaged.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Dipankar Datta condemned these practices, stating, “The benefits granted to these privileged and well-off classes come at a cost, as they effectively deprive and deny essentials to the marginalized and socially vulnerable populations.” The court also noted that such actions erode trust in democratic institutions and foster resentment among ordinary citizens.
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
Cancellation of Government Orders
The judgment ordered the cancellation of several government orders issued since 2005 that enabled discounted land allotments in Hyderabad’s satellite towns. It also mandated the refund of amounts paid by beneficiaries, including stamp duties and development charges, with interest.
The court underscored the importance of equitable distribution of land, a scarce and valuable urban resource. It criticized the preferential policy, stating, “This treatment conveys the message that certain individuals are entitled to more, not due to the necessities of their public office or the public good, but simply because of their status.”
Economic and Democratic Implications
The bench highlighted how such policies distort market forces and reduce public revenue by undervaluing land. From a governance perspective, it stated, “The classification giving State largesse to judges, MPs, MLAs, officers of the All India Services, journalists, etc., favours a privileged segment, excluding the socio-economically disadvantaged.”
The court noted that individuals representing the four pillars of democracy—legislators, bureaucrats, judges, and journalists—are expected to act as checks on arbitrary state power. However, preferential benefits undermine this role. The court declared, “Such policies foster systemic inequities by favoring the advantaged while barring the deserving and similarly situated from equal access.”
Constitutional Benchmarks for Resource Allocation
The judgment clarified that while states have discretion in resource allocation, it must adhere to constitutional principles of fairness and equality. “The State cannot exercise discretion to benefit a select few elites disproportionately, especially ones who are already enjoying pre-existing advantages,” the bench observed.
A Message to Governments
The ruling serves as a precedent against the arbitrary distribution of state resources and a reminder to governments to prioritize the welfare of the underprivileged. The Telangana government has been directed to address land allocation in light of this verdict. As of this report, no political parties in Telangana have commented on the development.
Read More: Maharashtra CM Race: Fadnavis In Delhi As Sena Backs Shinde
