BRS MLC K Kavitha has made serious allegations regarding changes in the Regional Ring Road (RRR) alignment, claiming it was altered to protect properties belonging to senior party leaders including T Harish Rao, Gangula Kamalakar, and MLC Naveen Rao.
According to Kavitha’s statement, approximately 400 acres of land between Reddy Palli, Chippalaturthi and Thunki belong to Harish Rao. She alleged that the alignment was specifically modified to protect his property, which houses a large resort that locals are reportedly not permitted to enter.
In Chinna Chintala Kunta, the alignment was allegedly changed to safeguard 15 acres belonging to Gangula Kamalakar. Similarly, MLC Naveen Rao reportedly benefited from alignment modifications that protected his 18 acres of land.
The allegations have raised concerns about the impact on small farmers in the region. Local farmers claim that while properties belonging to these three BRS leaders were protected through alignment changes, 59 acres belonging to 56 small farmers were sacrificed in the process.
The Regional Ring Road is a major infrastructure project designed to ease traffic congestion and improve connectivity around the region. However, controversies surrounding land acquisition and route alignment have emerged as contentious issues.
These allegations come at a time when questions about land acquisition procedures and protection of farmer interests have become politically sensitive topics in Telangana. The claims suggest that powerful political figures may have influenced infrastructure planning to protect their personal property interests.
The affected farmers have expressed frustration that their smaller land holdings were not given the same consideration as the larger properties allegedly belonging to political leaders. They argue that the alignment changes have disproportionately impacted small landholders while benefiting those with political connections.
As of now, neither T Harish Rao, Gangula Kamalakar, nor MLC Naveen Rao have issued official responses to these allegations. The controversy highlights ongoing debates about fairness in infrastructure development and land acquisition processes in the state.
