It is pointed out that Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories was founded in the year 1984 and by 1998, it was a leading pharmaceutical player in the company and abroad with a net worth of more than $1.67 billion, thus exposing the favoritism conferred, as a part of misuse of his office by the 8th respondent and in proximate closeness thereafter, one Sri K. Satish Reddy, S/o K. Anji Reddy, the Founder and top executive of Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, has entered into a transaction for purchase of Ac.3.14 of land held by the family members of the 8th respondent for a little more than Rs.3 Crores, whereas the market value of such lands in the vicinity was not up above Rs.12 Lakhs per acre and thus the purchase of land by the family members of Dr. K. Anji Reddy is a quid pro quo for the favour of sales tax deferment of Rs.25 Crores conferred on Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories and that Sri Satish Reddy entered into a deal with M/s. Divyasree Soft Tech Realtors Private Limited and developed a super structure comprising of proximately 5,00,000 sq.ft on the land purchased by him from the family members of 8th respondent and the said built up area has been leased out to Google TM company at Rs.2 Crore per month rental and that Divyasree group of companies are all companies belonging to the family of the 8threspondent. Further, Government of Andhra Pradesh has allotted Ac.7.00 of land in favour of Divyasree Soft Tech Realtors Private Limited, under the guise of allotment of land to software companies in the area of Ac.600.00 earmarked for software development in Kondapur locality and thus, the 8th respondent has misused and abused his official position either as Minister of State or Minister of Cabinet Rank or as Chief Minister and has amassed massive wealth in his own name and in the name of his immediate family members.
The petitioner has pointed out that, between 1999-2009, the total value of the assets declared by the 8th respondent have risen to a little more than Rs.12.33 Crores while, during the same period, the value of the assets of the 9th respondent, his wife rose to a little more than Rs.56.33 Crores, while the value of the assets of his minor son also raised to a little more than Rs.5 Crores and therefore the writ petitioner alleged that the 8th respondent has amassed wealth which is far disproportionate to his known sources of income. Further, several assets held by the 8th respondent and his other family members have not been brought out into the open and if their values are also taken into consideration, the wealth of the 8th respondent will further zoom past. More
