Justice Anil Kumar says HYDRAA Commissioner became ‘a law unto himself’, directs to file apology in contempt case
The Telangana High Court on Friday (July 24, 2026) came down heavily on the actions of Hyderabad Disaster Response and Asset Protection Agency (HYDRAA) Commissioner
The Telangana High Court on Friday (July 24, 2026) came down heavily on the actions of Hyderabad Disaster Response and Asset Protection Agency (HYDRAA) Commissioner and IPS officer A.V. Ranganath, which compelled a private company to file three contempt of court petitions against him, and directed him to file an affidavit with apology and explanation of his interference in a matter relating to 40 acres of land in Lothkunta village, Ranga Reddy district. Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti of the High Court, recalling the previous day order to deploy army forces to ensure HYDRAA officials are prevented from interfering with the property — mentioned in the contempt of court plea filed by M/s Shanta Sriram Constructions Private Limited, said the HYDRAA Commissioner had become ‘a law unto himself’.
“It had become a regular phenomenon for them to flout orders of the court,” the judge said. The judge on Thursday passed a direction of positioning army forces at the site in Lothkunta. But he kept it in abeyance till Friday soon after the Advocate General A. Sudershan Reddy assured the bench that an affidavit would be filed by HYDRAA Commissioner in the matter. On Friday, when the matter came up for hearing, the judge said he was recalling the order of deploying army forces at the indulgence of the Advocate General. The judge made it clear that HYDRAA Commissioner should file an affidavit with apology and explain the reasons for entering the property of the petitioner despite specific orders from the HC not to do so.
“Three contempts in a single matter and a counter affidavit without an apology…what is the audacity of the officer..?”, the judge wondered. Referring to the counter affidavit filed by the HYDRAA Commissioner, Justice Anil Kumar said there cannot be a counter affidavit in a contempt case. The HYDRAA officials entering the petitioner’s land and demolishing the property was a wilful disobedience of the court orders issue on June 10 in the matter, the judge said. Revenue Department had specific provisions in a Special Act to deal with encroachments of lands. ‘Should we abolish all other Acts and say only the HYDRAA Act remain?’ Is the officer a law unto himself?, the judge remarked.
Three contempts in a single matter would be difficult for any court to digest. “This is wrong, senior….What the officer is doing is wrong…. He cannot interfere in a matter which was already decided by the Supreme Court,” the judge said.
The BriefWire