Kaleshwaram case: Telangana High Court quashes PC Ghose Commission findings against KCR, others

Telangana High Court Ruling

The Telangana High Court has quashed the findings of the PC Ghose Commission of Inquiry that were against former chief minister K Chandrashekar Rao (KCR) and other officials, stating that the findings were prejudicial to their conduct and reputation.

In a decision made public on Wednesday, the High Court addressed the writ petitions submitted by KCR, former minister T Harish Rao, retired chief secretary S K Joshi, and former CMO secretary Smita Sabharwal. The court determined that the commission’s findings violated principles of natural justice.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G M Mohiuddin ruled that while the constitution of the commission itself was valid, the findings rendered were not enforceable. They noted that the conclusions drawn by the commission were rendered “in violation of principles of natural justice” and stated that no actions could be taken based on those findings.

Background of the Case

KCR and others approached the High Court following a decision by the state government to refer the commission’s report to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on September 1, amid extensive discussions in the Assembly. Prior to this, the court had granted interim relief to the petitioners, protecting them from any adverse actions.

The Ghose Commission, established by the previous Congress government, was tasked with scrutinizing alleged irregularities in the Kaleshwaram Lift Irrigation Project (KLIP) during the tenure of the Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS). The commission submitted its findings to the government on July 31 last year, detailing grave irregularities in various aspects of the project, including its conceptualization, planning, execution, and financial management.

This inquiry was initiated following a structural failure of the Medigadda pillars on October 21, 2023. Concerns were raised that the adverse findings of the commission would be used as a basis for subsequent CBI investigations against the petitioners.

Petitioners’ Allegations

KCR and Harish Rao filed their petitions on September 2, 2025, expressing fears that the commission’s findings would adversely affect their reputations and lead to unwarranted legal consequences. Joshi and Sabharwal submitted their requests to the High Court on September 3 and September 25, respectively.

They challenged the commission’s procedures, asserting that they were not provided proper notifications as mandated by sections 8-B and 8-C of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952. The petitioners contended that this constituted a breach of legal provisions and principles of natural justice, as they had insufficient opportunities to respond to the allegations or to cross-examine over 190 witnesses who had testified before the commission.