The Telangana High Court vacated its interim order restraining land acquisition for the Phase II Metro Rail Project and permitted authorities to proceed with work on the Mahatma Gandhi Bus Station (MGBS) to Chandrayanagutta stretch, subject to strict compliance with law. Justice NV Shravan Kumar allowed an interlocutory application by the state and other authorities and set aside the interim order dated 10 January 2025 in the writ petition by Mahammed Abdul Raoof and seven others. The decision balanced project continuity with protection of legal rights pending final adjudication. The petitioners had challenged orders issued by the Hyderabad district collector under Section 15(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR Act, 2013) that rejected their objections to the proposed acquisition. They contended that the acquisition disproportionately affected properties on one side of the road, resulting in substantial loss of houses and long running commercial establishments and questioned the proposed 100-foot road widening, survey and alignment. They also alleged that the compensation offered was substantially below prevailing market value. Authorities told the court that the alignment followed the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA) master plan and the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) road development plan and that surveys had used drone and LiDAR technology. They said negotiations produced consent awards of up to Rs 81,000 per square yard along with structural compensation and rehabilitation and resettlement benefits. The court noted that determination of metro alignment and technical feasibility lies with expert authorities and relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Union of India v. Kushala Shetty to limit judicial review. Balancing larger public interest and the need for continuity of the metro network, the court permitted execution while reiterating that all questions on legality and procedural compliance of the land acquisition remain open for final hearing. The ruling requires authorities to adhere to statutory safeguards as work proceeds. The matter will return for final adjudication at the scheduled hearing.