GHMC trifurcation challenged in HC

Hyderabad: The state government’s decision to divide the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) into three corporations was challenged in the Telangana High Court on Thursday. The top court has asked the state and the central government to file counters within three weeks.

A writ petition was filed in the court stating that reorganization was contrary to the jurisdictional freeze imposed in connection with Census 2027. The writ petition No. 4891 of 2026, filed by BJP leader D Guruva Reddy, challenged GO 55 issued on February 11, 2026, reorganizing GHMC into three corporations. Senior advocate Rajkumar Gummi appeared on behalf of Guruva Reddy.

The impugned Government Order sought to reorganize the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) into three separate municipal corporations. The petitioner has contended that the said reorganization is contrary to the jurisdictional freeze imposed in connection with Census 2027.

The government had recently trifurcated the GHMC into GHMC, Cyberabad and Malkajgiri corporations for administrative convenience. The government had also appointed commissioners for these three corporations and a special officer to oversee the day-to-day activities.

The advocate specifically pleaded that the Registrar General and Census Commissioner, India, issued a circular on August 13, 2025, imposing a jurisdictional freeze on administrative boundaries with effect from December 31, 2025, for the purposes of Census 2027. In view of the said freeze, any alteration of municipal limits, bifurcation, or reorganization of local bodies after the freeze date is stated to be impermissible in law and liable to be declared void ab initio.

The petitioner has accordingly sought appropriate relief to declare GO No. 55 as illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction, being in violation of the Census-related jurisdictional freeze.

The petitioner further said that the Constitution of India contemplates a federal structure where the Union and States must cooperate to achieve constitutional objectives. Census enumeration is a Union subject under Entry 69, List I (Union List), and was essential for the functioning of representative democracy, delimitation of constituencies, and equitable resource distribution.

The petitioner said that if administrative reorganization was deemed necessary, rational timing would have dictated implementation either before December 31, 2025 (in compliance with the census freeze) or after March 2027 (after census completion). Choosing to implement the reorganization precisely when it would maximally disrupt census operations is patently unreasonable.

After hearing the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner, the Court issued notices to the central government and the state government, directing them to file their respective counters within a period of three weeks. The matter is expected to be listed for further hearing upon completion of pleadings.