Former Minister Nagam Janardhan Reddy filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) alleging financial irregularities in the Palamuru-Rangareddy Lift Irrigation Scheme (PRLIS), which the Supreme Court rejected on Wednesday.

After a lengthy hearing on Wednesday, the Supreme Court bench, led by Justice B. V. Nagarathna and including Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, dismissed the SLP recording, ruling that there were no grounds to overturn the Telangana High Court’s decision to dismiss the Public Interest Litigation filed by Dr. Nagam Janardhan Reddy via Order dated 03.12.2018.

The Supreme Court bench noted that, as there are now no open appeals, four further lawsuits that Dr. Nagam had brought in the High Court over the same project had either been rejected or disposed of. Additionally, it was noted that the Central Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) had concluded unequivocally that the accusations were unsupported in his handling of the charge brought forward by the same Nagam on this matter.

Senior attorney Prashant Bhushan, who represented petitioner Dr. Nagam, was asked by the court how a Writ Petition to declare the rate revision illegitimate can be filed before the High Court. In response, Bhushan asked the bench to disregard that portion of the request and concentrate on the second section, which asked for the Central Bureau of Investigation to be directed to look into the claimed fraud.

According to Justice Nagarathna, the State may have used business sense to revise tariffs or ratios. He also questioned how the courts could order the CBI to conduct an investigation. According to her, courts are unable to oversee every state activity. In his remarks on behalf of Megha Engineering & Infrastructures Ltd. (MEIL), senior lawyer and former Attorney General Mukul Rohtagi expressed concerns over the SLP’s maintainability. He told the court that for the last ten years, the same petitioner, Dr. Nagam, has been harassing them by bringing many lawsuits against them in the High Court, CVC, etc. He called the court’s attention to the CVC’s conclusion on Dr. Nagam’s complaint.

The Supreme Court panel issued its decision rejecting the SLP after carefully considering the arguments made by both parties.