Hyderabad, April 23: In a significant legal development, the Telangana High Court has granted major relief to Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) chief K Chandrasekhar Rao and three others by directing that no action be initiated against them based on the findings of the PC Ghose Commission, which investigated alleged irregularities in the Kaleshwaram Lift Irrigation Project.
A division bench led by Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G M Mohiuddin delivered the verdict while hearing a batch of petitions filed by Rao, former minister T Harish Rao, and others.
Court Upholds Commission, But Voids Key Findings
While declining to strike down the formation of the inquiry panel headed by retired Supreme Court judge P C Ghose, the court ruled that the commission itself was legally constituted and did not violate constitutional provisions.
However, the bench made it clear that portions of the report adversely affecting the petitioners cannot be acted upon. It observed that such findings were reached in violation of principles of natural justice and statutory safeguards under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952.
The court stated that any conclusions harming the reputation or conduct of the petitioners would remain “inoperative,” effectively preventing authorities from using the report as a basis for further legal or administrative action.
Background of the Controversy
The commission had been tasked with probing alleged lapses and irregularities during the execution of the Kaleshwaram project, one of Telangana’s largest irrigation initiatives undertaken during the BRS .
After completing its inquiry, the panel submitted its report to the state government, which was later tabled in the Assembly in August 2025. Following discussions, Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy announced that the matter would be referred to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for further probe.
The commission’s findings had held Rao accountable for alleged procedural and execution-related irregularities. It also pointed to the role of Harish Rao, then irrigation minister, along with several senior bureaucrats, in decisions related to barrages and other structural components of the project.
Legal Challenge by Petitioners
Challenging the report, the petitioners including former Chief Secretary Shailendra Kumar Joshi and senior IAS officer Smita Sabharwal approached the High Court seeking its annulment. They argued that the inquiry process was fundamentally flawed and violated their legal rights.
A key contention raised was the denial of an opportunity to cross examine allegations and present a proper defence. The petitioners maintained that the commission failed to share evidence or supporting materials before arriving at adverse conclusions.
Court Highlights Procedural Lapses
Accepting these arguments in part, the High Court underscored that adherence to due process is essential, particularly when findings impact an individual’s reputation. The bench noted that failure to comply with Section 8B of the Commissions of Inquiry Act which mandates giving affected persons a chance to be heard renders such findings legally untenable.
This observation became the basis for invalidating the actionable portions of the report without dismantling the commission itself.
Implications for Future Action
Legal experts indicate that the ruling significantly weakens the enforceability of the commission’s findings. Members of the BRS legal team claimed the report had effectively lost its relevance following the judgment.
They further argued that investigative agencies, including the CBI, would find it difficult to rely on the commission’s conclusions for initiating proceedings. However, the judgment does not entirely bar independent investigations, provided they are not based solely on the disputed report.
Political and Legal Significance
The verdict marks a crucial moment in Telangana’s political and legal landscape, as it balances the legitimacy of institutional inquiries with the necessity of procedural fairness.
While the court has preserved the authority of commissions of inquiry, it has also reinforced the principle that due process cannot be compromised, especially in cases involving high-profile public figures and large-scale infrastructure projects.
The Telangana HC Kaleshwaram verdict is expected to have wider implications for how future inquiry reports are conducted, scrutinised, and implemented across the country.