HYDRAA officials are not super cops: Justice Anil Kumar

The Telangana High Court closed two contempt of court cases against HYDRAA Commissioner A.V. Ranganath, after the HYDRAA standing counsel gave an undertaking that HYDRAA officers would not interfere with property of a petitioner in Lothkunta of Medchal Malkajgiri district.

Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti, pronouncing common order in the two contempt cases, observed that officers of HYDRAA ‘are not super cops of governance (in their field)’. They cannot act beyond the purview of law, the order said. Referring to the lands in survey nos. 1 and 2 of Lothkunta, the judge said the court opined that the ‘act of HYDRAA is a flagrant violation of the orders of the court’.

“It is apparent that the offices of HYDRAA are of the notion that they are a Class Apart…I am afraid they are not so and they can’t be,” the judge said in the verdict. He said the HYDRAA officials were part of the governance and had to remain so. The petitioner M/s Shanta Sriram Constructions Private Limited filed a writ petition in 2016 challenging proceedings issued by district Revenue officials, including Trimulgherry Tehsildar, over the lands in the said survey numbers.

The HC in 2021 directed the authorities not to interfere with the petitioner’s property. Eventually, the petitioner filed two contempt cases stating that officials were violating the court orders. On January 9, 2026, the officials gave an undertaking that they would not interfere with the petitioner’s property. However, again the HYDRAA officials allegedly entered the property citing the complaint lodged by an organisation called Society to Save Rocks, following which the petitioner filed two fresh contempt cases.

The judge made it clear to the authorities of HYDRAA that they ‘should not venture into such misadventures’. “Officers may be enthusiastic to undertake or perform acts in the interest of the State but such acts have to be within four corners of law”. Justice Anil Kumar said the HYDRAA officers erred in interfering with the petitioner’s property. The actions of HYDRAA are illegal and cannot be sustained, the verdict said.

Published - June 16, 2026 08:15 pm IST