Remarks that there was a complete lack of coordination among government departments, resulting in arbitrary executive action
Published Date – 30 July 2026, 09:25 PM
Hyderabad: Justice N V Shravan Kumar of the Telangana High Court on Thursday passed strong comments against HYDRAA, observing that it was not the constitutional courts that were being misled by private litigants, but HYDRAA and other government authorities who were misleading the Court.
The observations came after the Tahsildar of Serilingampally informed the Court that neither he nor his office had instructed HYDRAA to demolish structures on the petitioner’s land. The Judge observed that the case itself answered the recent criticism that constitutional courts were being misled and remarked that there was a complete lack of coordination among government departments, resulting in arbitrary executive action.
The observations came during the hearing of a writ petition filed by Pemmasani Sudha Rani, alleging that officials of the Revenue Department and HYDRAA illegally demolished the compound wall and a watchman’s room on her Plot No 9/B, admeasuring 350 square yards in Survey No.60 of Kondapur Village, Serilingampally Mandal, without issuing notice or following due process, despite earlier directions of the High Court.
It may be recalled that during the previous hearing, HYDRAA had informed the Court that the demolition was carried out on the instructions of the Tahsildar of Serilingampally, following which the Court directed the Tahsildar to appear in person.
Appearing before the Court on Thursday, the Tahsildar categorically stated that neither he nor his office had issued any communication directing demolition in Survey No 60. He clarified that the communication relied upon by HYDRAA related only to government land in Survey No 59, whereas the petitioner’s plot was situated in Survey No 60 which is private land according to official records.
Questioning HYDRAA’s action, Justice Shravan Kumar asked how the agency concluded that the petitioner’s land formed part of Survey No 59 and whether any verification or survey had been conducted before proceeding with the demolition. When HYDRAA maintained that it acted on the Tahsildar’s communication dated October 1, 2025, the Court repeatedly questioned whether the District Collector had authorised the demolition, why no notice was issued to the petitioner and what warranted demolishing the structures within three days. The Court also asked whether any outside force had pressured HYDRAA to carry out the demolition.
Referring to recent criticism that constitutional courts were being misled by private litigants, Justice Shravan Kumar observed, “It is a clear case of who is misleading whom. The courts are not misled… the officers are misleading.” The Judge further remarked that there was an utter failure of the administration, with departments acting without coordinating with each other.
Responding to criticism directed at the judiciary, the Court observed, “You cannot talk about the institutions. What are the courts meant for?” The Judge further observed that even if the land was government land, the authorities were bound to issue notice and follow the due process prescribed under the Telangana Land Encroachment Act.
Questioning whether HYDRAA was functioning as a parallel executive, Justice Shravan Kumar observed that the agency was demolishing structures without verifying records or respecting court orders. “You do whatever you want… you demolish without following the procedure… you don’t care about court orders. You either don’t check the records or conduct a survey,” the Judge observed, while endorsing the recent observations made by Justice Jukanti Anil Kumar on HYDRAA’s functioning.
Directing all the respondents to file detailed counters explaining the demolition, the Court ordered the Tahsildar to remain present on every date of hearing until disposal of the writ petition.
