The Telangana High Court restrained HYDRAA from carrying out demolitions without a defined SOP, except for encroachments on public land, while criticising alleged pre-dawn actions and emphasising adherence to due process and legal safeguards.
Published Date – 14 April 2026, 07:18 AM
Hyderabad: Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court on Monday directed the Hyderabad Disaster Response and Asset Protection Agency (HYDRAA) not to carry out demolitions in the city and municipal areas, except in cases relating to removal of encroachments on river bodies, nalas and public roads.
The court expressed serious concern over repeated violations of its earlier orders and the absence of a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) governing demolition drives. Observing that he had been hearing “hundreds of cases,” the judge noted that no SOP had been placed on record for demolitions within the limits of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation.
The direction came in a writ petition filed by M.A. Shareef, a 98-year-old agriculturist from Ailapur village in Ameenpur mandal, who alleged that officials accompanied by uniformed personnel entered his land at about 4.30 a.m. on Saturday and demolished multiple structures, including a two-storeyed ancestral house, water tank, compound walls and animal sheds. He further alleged that CCTV cameras and related equipment were also taken away.
Senior counsel L. Ravichander, appearing for the petitioner, described the operation as a “war-like situation” and questioned the presence of unidentified persons in safari suits during the demolition. He argued that such actions lacked statutory backing and violated established safeguards against early morning or weekend demolitions, which courts have repeatedly cautioned against.
During the hearing, the senior counsel also objected to what he termed as factual inconsistencies in submissions made by the State, represented by Additional Advocate General Imran Khan. When the law officer indicated that he was not fully instructed, the court was told that citizens similarly caught unaware in pre-dawn demolitions were left with no opportunity to respond.
It was further submitted that the petitioner’s ownership traces back over a century, supported by a judicial declaration recognising title since 1902. The matter formed part of a batch of lunch motion cases led by advocate Deepak Misra, all raising grievances of alleged high-handed action in Ameenpur mandal.
Making strong observations, Justice Vijaysen Reddy said it was “shocking” that demolitions were undertaken without notice and in violation of principles of natural justice. Even assuming the constructions were unauthorised, the court questioned how authorities permitted them to come up in the first place and later proceeded with demolition in disregard of due process.
The judge also took note of HYDRAA’s justification that its actions were aimed at protecting public interest by restoring water bodies. While acknowledging the objective, the court emphasised that such measures must be carried out strictly in accordance with law. Pointing out that more than a year had passed since HYDRAA’s formation, the court remarked that there remained a lack of clarity on the source of its powers and the procedural framework governing its actions.
Until an SOP or statutory guidelines are framed under the relevant municipal laws, the agency was restrained from acting in matters involving internal roads or removal of compound walls.The case will be taken up for further hearing after the State places its response on record.
