Telangana High Court seeks visual on Metro Corridor VI
HYDERABAD: The Telangana High Court on Thursday asked the State Government to prepare an audio visual presentation explaining the exact alignment of the proposed Corridor VI of the Hyderabad Metro Rail Phase II project.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice GM Mohiuddin said repeated oral submissions were not helping the court gain clarity and directed the State to rely on visual aids.
The court was hearing a public interest litigation, along with a connected writ petition, challenging metro construction within the Charminar and Falaknuma heritage zones. The petitioners sought a halt to all work in these precincts until a heritage impact assessment is conducted by an independent committee and statutory approvals are secured under the Telangana Heritage Act, 2017, and the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
Heritage rules and RTI claims
Advocate Immaneni Rama Rao, appearing for Act Public Welfare Foundation, argued that Government Order Ms. No. 4 dated January 2, 2003, prohibits excavation, demolition or construction in Charminar precinct-10 and Falaknuma precinct-12. He cited an RTI response to contend that the Government had not obtained the required permissions for the metro project.
Additional Advocate General Mohammed Imran Khan, representing the State, placed eight design sketches before the Bench and said the allegations were baseless. He told the court that no protected structures had been touched and that the proposed alignment runs over or alongside existing structures, with only a window and a compound wall potentially affected.
He assured the court that all necessary approvals would be obtained before work progresses.
Alignment beyond restricted zone, says State
On the RTI issue, the State argued that heritage permissions were not triggered as the route lies between 700 metres and one kilometre from the Charminar, placing it outside the 500-metre restricted zone.
When the Bench suggested that the alignment be demonstrated visually instead of relying on paper drawings and extended oral arguments, the Additional Advocate-General undertook to produce a computer-generated simulation clearly marking heritage sites.
Observing that “oral arguments are not taking us anywhere”, the court adjourned the matter to January 8, 2026, directing the State to come prepared with the audiovisual presentation.
