High Court backs Hydra commissioner verdict, slams officials for misleading court
Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court said the Hydra commissioner verdict delivered earlier by Justice Anil Kumar was fully justified and accused government officials, not private individuals, of misleading the court. Justice NV Sravankumar said courts were only discharging their constitutional duties because authorities were failing to act according to law. He rejected claims that private citizens were misleading the judiciary and instead blamed officials for creating such situations.
The judge observed that government officials had repeatedly violated court orders and attempted to shift responsibility to one another. He said such conduct reflected serious administrative failure. The bench also criticised authorities for ignoring legal procedure before carrying out demolitions.
The observations came during the hearing of a petition filed by Pemmasani Sudharani. She challenged the demolition of a guard and watchman’s room on her 350-square-yard patta land in Survey No. 60 at Kondapur in Serilingampalli mandal of Rangareddy district.
Advocate S. Sridhar, appearing for the petitioner, argued that the Serilingampalli Tahsildar had written to the District Collector in October last year regarding the protection of government land in Survey No. 59. He said the Collector later sought police assistance and marked a copy to Hydra. However, Hydra officials demolished the structure on Survey No. 60 on November 1 without issuing any notice.
The petitioner also pointed out that the High Court had already ruled in 2022 that Survey No. 59 was government land while Survey No. 60 was patta land. Counsel argued that authorities ignored those findings and failed to follow mandatory legal procedure before taking action.
Court questions Hydra commissioner verdict implementation
Justice NV Sravankumar questioned how the Tahsildar had communicated with Hydra regarding a structure located on private land. The court earlier directed the Tahsildar to appear in person, and he complied during Thursday’s hearing.
The government counsel argued that the Tahsildar had only shared information for protecting government land after the earlier High Court judgment. He maintained that the Tahsildar had never instructed Hydra to demolish any structure. Meanwhile, Hydra’s counsel, Sameer Ahmed, said officials were unaware of the High Court’s 2022 order and acted on information received from the Revenue Department.
The bench said ignorance of court orders could not justify demolition without notice. It stressed that authorities must issue notices, provide affected parties an opportunity to respond, and then proceed according to law. The judge remarked that repeated violations of court directions and attempts to shift blame showed a breakdown in governance.
Justice Sravankumar further questioned how officials concluded that the petitioner’s property formed part of government land. He asked whether any survey was conducted, whether notices were served, and why the demolition was carried out within three days. The bench also sought to know whether the District Collector had directed the demolition or whether any external pressure influenced Hydra’s action.
The High Court observed that Hydra appeared to be carrying out demolitions without verifying records or following due process. It directed the concerned officials to file detailed counters explaining every action taken in chronological order. The matter was adjourned to August 6, and the Serilingampalli Tahsildar was ordered to remain personally present at every hearing until further orders.