While dismissing the public interest litigation (PIL) filed by an advocate, the court observed that there was no reason for the court to intervene in the investigations.
T Ranga Rao, the petitioner, pleaded that the entire investigation into the case should be done under the supervision of the high court.
Alleging that the investigations were going on in a partial manner, the petitioner said the high court should supervise the case, just as the Supreme Court had done in the 2G spectrum case.
The PIL had also sought direction to the government not to effect changes in the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) team investigating the case. Mr Rao referred to the reports that CBI Joint Director VV Lakshminarayana, who is heading the probe, will complete his deputation in the CBI by June end and will be sent back to his parent department in Maharashtra.
The advocate claimed that only Mr Lakshminarayana would be able to take the case to its logical conclusion.
It was on the direction of the high court in 2011 that the CBI had taken up investigations into the allegations that Mr Reddy amassed huge wealth through illegal means when his father YS Rajasekhara Reddy was the chief minister from 2004 to 2009.
Meanwhile, the high court adjourned to June 6 the hearing on another petition, seeking removal of Roads and Buildings Minister Dharmana Prasada Rao for his alleged involvement in case.
The court issued notice to the government to file its counter.
The petitioner sought the minister's removal on the ground that the CBI had named him as an accused in a chargesheet in VANPIC, one of the aspects of the case.
OM Debara, a resident of Hyderabad, also sought direction to the state government to accept the minister's resignation.
The petitioner pointed out that the minister had submitted his resignation after he was named in the chargesheet last year but his resignation was not accepted by Chief Minister N Kiran Kumar Reddy.