Telangana High Court Slams HYDRAA Over Law Violations

The Telangana High Court has strongly criticized the Hyderabad Disaster Response and Asset Protection Agency (HYDRAA) over its demolition drive in Kukatpally, accusing the agency of disregarding judicial orders and acting without following due legal procedure.

While hearing a batch of contempt petitions related to a 13.17-acre property in Kukatpally, Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka expressed serious concern over HYDRAA’s actions, describing them as part of a recurring pattern where demolitions are carried out first and explanations are offered later.

Court Questions HYDRAA's Approach

The case revolves around land located in Survey Nos. 1003 to 1006 in Kukatpally. HYDRAA had undertaken demolition and possession-related operations on May 25 and 26, claiming that the property formed part of a water body.

However, the High Court pointed out that it had already examined the matter in 2025 and noted that the land had been regularized by the government under GO Ms No. 469 issued in March 2008. The owners had reportedly paid over Rs 9 crore as part of the regularization process.

Based on those records, the court had previously observed that the property could not be categorized as lake land, tank land, or shikam land.

Strong Remarks Against Demolition Drive

Justice Bheemapaka observed that government agencies are expected to function within the framework of law and respect court directives. Instead, the court noted that HYDRAA proceeded with demolitions despite existing judicial orders.

The judge remarked that such actions reflected a concerning trend of treating court directions as obstacles rather than binding instructions. The court also criticized the practice of carrying out demolition drives and subsequently presenting them as achievements.

Restoration Ordered Within 24 Hours

Taking a serious view of the matter, the High Court directed HYDRAA and revenue authorities to restore the property to its original condition within 24 hours.

The order requires authorities to reverse all demolition activities, restore possession, rebuild damaged structures where necessary, and reinstate the compound fencing around the property.

Water Body Restoration Must Follow Due Process

The court clarified that its earlier orders did not prevent authorities from taking lawful steps to revive any existing water body in the area. However, such actions must be carried out strictly in accordance with legal procedures and established regulations.

Officials were reminded that environmental restoration efforts cannot override property rights without following due process.

Next Hearing on June 4

The contempt cases have been scheduled for further hearing on June 4. The court is expected to review compliance with its restoration order and hear additional submissions from both sides.

The case has drawn significant attention as it raises important questions about administrative powers, property rights, and the obligation of government agencies to comply with judicial directives.

Also read: IPL 2026 Final: RCB vs GT Live Streaming, Rain Rules and Match Details