Hyderabad: Telangana high court on Wednesday observed that if the state paid timely compensation for land parcels acquired and created jobs and employment opportunities for citizens, they may not need govt-sponsored schemes like ‘Kalyana Lakshmi’ or ‘Shaadi Mubarak’, etc.Stating that “several land losers — some even across generations — who contributed to the state and nation building by giving up their land are in courts seeking compensation”, high court asked the state about its priorities.“We are not telling the state how it has to spend its finances, but is statutory compensation for land losers your priority or welfare schemes?” Justice NV Shravan Kumar asked, raising these concerns while hearing a petition challenging the constitutional legality of these schemes, and posed pointed questions to the state on how these schemes were backed and what law governs them.Posting the matter to Thursday, Aug 20, for further hearing, the judge directed additional advocate general Mohd Imran Khan to get clear instructions on “how the state is going to clear land acquisition dues, while making it clear the land losers have to be given the first preference and compensation has to be paid to them. High Court had on Aug 12 stayed the schemes after the state sought additional time for filing a counter in the matter.The judge further observed that there was a hue and cry in courts regarding land acquisition compensations, while even 50% were not paid. “I have done my own research on this aspect. Assurances are given (from govt in the court), tokens are raised, but payments are not done. What is the state’s priority? These are all seriously debatable issues,” the judge said.While advocate Vijay Gopal appearing in person contended that the counter filed by govt was evasive and pointed to gaps with regard to constitutional legality, Imran Khan contended that such schemes were operating across the country, and these schemes were particularly aimed at girl child empowerment, and urged the court to vacate the stay on the schemes. He also urged the court for an opportunity to file a detailed counter explaining how the scheme has been benefitting young girls across the state, its funding, legal backing and other aspects.The judge, however, pointed out that the courts were never against such welfare schemes, even as there were several such programmes with a social cause.“The issue is priorities, courts are flooded with contempt cases. When we speak of social causes, land losers should also be looked into. Courts never held anything about schemes. But only asking how they are backed and under what statute. We are also asking about land losers who are also contributing to nation building,” the judge stated.
