Officials from the Naspur municipality are under criticism for alleged inconsistencies in enforcing construction norms for new housing. A layout spanning 1.39 acres in Theegalpahad village received only tentative approval in 2023, yet construction on four row houses commenced without final authorization, violating the Telangana Municipal Act 2019 and TSbPASS-2020. Reports by the District Town and Country Planning Officer and the District Panchayat Officer highlighted these infractions, yet, on September 29, officials surprisingly granted permission for the ongoing constructions.
This approval contrasts sharply with the recent demolition of a five-story building owned by a local leader for similar violations. Allegations suggest political influence, as one developer is reportedly associated with the Congress party, possibly pressuring officials into permitting the construction. Critics argue the municipality favors influential individuals while enforcing stricter standards on ordinary citizens. The Naspur Municipal Commissioner declined to comment, while questions linger over the district Collector’s role in granting final approval despite clear violations.
Officials of the Naspur municipality are facing significant backlash over alleged inconsistencies in enforcing building regulations for new construction projects within their jurisdiction. At the center of this controversy is a recently developed layout covering 1.39 acres in Theegalpahad village, which lies within the Naspur municipal limits. Although the layout received tentative approval in 2023, it was never granted final approval as required by the Telangana Municipal Act of 2019 and TSbPASS-2020. According to these regulations, construction should not proceed in a layout that has only received tentative approval. However, four row houses were observed to be under construction within the layout without securing final approval or permission from the competent authorities.
Inspection reports prepared by District Town and Country Planning Officer (DTCPO) Sampath and District Panchayat Officer (DPO) Venkateshwar Rao noted these violations. During their visit to the site, the officers observed that plots numbered 11, 12, 13, and 14 were in the process of construction despite lacking prior authorization. This report, submitted to District Collector Kumar Deepak on August 5, emphasized the disregard for municipal norms in these constructions. These findings raised concerns about potential gaps in regulatory oversight within the municipality.
Despite the initial lack of authorization, municipal officials granted permission for the construction of these four row houses on September 29, sparking further controversy. Just days earlier, on September 19, officials from Naspur municipality demolished a five-story building belonging to Deekonda Annaiah, a leader of the Telangana Boggu Ghani Karmeeka Sangham (TGBKS), on grounds that it violated the same Telangana Municipal Act. This action drew attention to what critics describe as “dual standards” in enforcing regulations. The abrupt issuance of permissions to the four row houses contrasted sharply with the strict measures taken against Annaiah’s building, leading to accusations that Naspur officials apply regulations selectively.
These inconsistencies have led to public scrutiny and raised questions about the impartiality of Naspur municipal officials. Reports indicate that one of the developers involved in the unauthorized construction has ties to the Congress party, suggesting that political influence may have played a role in the approval. Sources allege that the municipality may have felt compelled to grant permission due to pressure exerted by influential political leaders. This alleged favoritism has fueled criticism that officials enforce regulations leniently for those with political connections while being more stringent with common citizens and local leaders unaffiliated with the ruling parties.
Under the Telangana Municipal Act and TSbPASS-2020, stringent guidelines govern the issuance of building permits and the approval of layouts. The municipality or corporation is prohibited from issuing any permits or allowing developments on land mortgaged to a municipality until the developer completes necessary developmental works, releases the land from mortgage, and receives final layout approval. The rules also require applicants to adhere strictly to the conditions laid out by the municipality and other concerned authorities, and any violation renders the layout permission invalid.
However, the recent developments in Naspur have cast doubt on the municipality’s commitment to upholding these standards. While the rules are explicit, the alleged exemptions granted to politically connected developers have led to accusations that the regulations are not enforced uniformly. The demolition of the five-story building, which lacked influence or ties to ruling factions, is perceived by many as an example of the municipality’s selective enforcement.
The situation has also raised questions about the role of District Collector Kumar Deepak, who heads the district layout committee and is responsible for overseeing the approval of layout projects. Despite the inspection report by the DTCPO and DPO highlighting the violations of municipal regulations, the Collector’s office recently granted final approval for the layout. This decision has prompted criticism, as it appears to overlook the concerns raised by the inspection officers regarding compliance. Observers question whether the Collector was aware of the reported violations or if other pressures influenced the final decision.
The Naspur Municipal Commissioner, Satish, has so far been unavailable for comment on the matter, adding to the frustration among citizens and local activists seeking clarity on these decisions. The commissioner’s absence from public discourse has led some to interpret the silence as an unwillingness to address or justify the municipality’s actions.
For citizens, these developments in Naspur underscore concerns over transparency, fairness, and accountability in local governance. There is a growing sense among the public that municipal regulations are selectively enforced, creating an uneven playing field that disadvantages ordinary residents and smaller developers. Local activists have voiced concerns that preferential treatment for politically connected individuals undermines trust in municipal governance and sets a negative precedent that regulations are only enforced when convenient.
The inconsistent application of building regulations also has broader implications for urban development in Naspur and the surrounding areas. When developers perceive that they can circumvent rules or secure retroactive approvals through political influence, they may be encouraged to ignore regulations, leading to unplanned and potentially unsafe construction practices. In addition, selective enforcement can deter legitimate developers from investing in the area, as they may perceive the regulatory environment as unpredictable or biased.
In response to this controversy, citizens and community groups in Naspur are calling for a more transparent and accountable system for managing building permits and layout approvals. Some advocates suggest that independent audits or regular reviews of municipal decisions could help ensure that building regulations are applied fairly and consistently. Others have called for a stronger role for citizen oversight committees, which could help identify cases of favoritism or regulatory leniency and hold municipal officials accountable for their actions.
The Naspur municipality’s approach to enforcing the Telangana Municipal Act and TSbPASS-2020 will likely remain under scrutiny in the coming months. Local stakeholders are watching closely to see if officials take corrective action or implement measures to prevent similar issues in the future. For now, however, the dual standards perceived in Naspur’s regulatory practices continue to cast a shadow over municipal governance and raise questions about the influence of political connections in local administration.
In the absence of a clear response from Naspur officials, the controversy is likely to persist, fueling public frustration and skepticism toward municipal authorities. The Naspur municipality may need to take transparent steps to address these concerns and rebuild public trust, such as conducting a comprehensive review of recent permits and demolitions to ensure compliance with municipal standards. Moving forward, consistent enforcement of building regulations and accountability for all stakeholders will be essential to restoring confidence in the municipality’s commitment to fair governance.