Telangana High Court Slams HYDRAA Over Land Fencing, Questions 'Bulldozer Justice'
The Telangana High Court on Tuesday issued a sharp rebuke to HYDRAA, the state's land agency, for fencing properties while claiming them as government land, raising serious concerns about its compliance with Supreme Court rulings on "bulldozer justice". Justice NV Shravan Kumar, presiding over the case, directly challenged HYDRAA's counsel, asking, "Doesn't HYDRAA want to follow the principles of natural justice laid down in the bulldozer judgment?" This pointed inquiry underscores the court's frustration with the agency's actions, which it deemed potentially unlawful and contemptuous.
Petitioner's Allegations and Court's Directives
The court's observations emerged during the hearing of a petition filed by NRI businessman Prasad N Tanjerla. He alleged that HYDRAA demolished a shed on his 1,351-square-yard plot in Gudimalkapur and fenced the area, violating court decrees from 2000 and 2003, as well as a judgment delivered in November 2026. In response, the judge directed HYDRAA to remove the fence and ordered the petitioner to maintain the status quo. The court censured the agency, stating that acting without proper background verification amounted to an "absolute abuse of the process of law" and "clear contempt of court." Justice Kumar noted that HYDRAA appeared to be "erratically fencing" lands without sufficient material to justify its actions, highlighting a pattern of hasty and unverified interventions.
Judicial Scrutiny on Land Verification and Agency Conduct
Justice Kumar questioned how HYDRAA determines whether lands are government-owned or sub judice, emphasizing that property is often acquired through a lifetime of savings. He observed that the agency frequently acts without verifying if the lands are notified government properties, public spaces like parks, or included in prohibited lists. The judge remarked that even if HYDRAA has the authority to fence such lands, it must possess supporting evidence. "Otherwise, it's like you are doing it on your own. Can that be accepted? You went much beyond the courts," he stated, underscoring the need for due diligence and legal adherence. Additionally, the court addressed allegations that HYDRAA officials seized visitors' mobile phones during interactions at their office, asking why the agency was making people suffer in this manner, further intensifying scrutiny over its operational ethics.
HYDRAA's Defense and Court's Final Ruling
In response, HYDRAA's counsel dismissed the allegations as "baseless" and urged the court not to form an opinion without giving the agency an opportunity to respond. He assured the court that a counter-affidavit would be filed, citing Supreme Court and high court precedents in its defense. However, the judge concluded that without proper documentation and complete knowledge of government land records, HYDRAA should refrain from fencing and remove existing fences. He clarified that the court would direct the agency to take possession only if it is conclusively proven that the lands are encroached upon. The matter was adjourned to March 3, pending further submissions and evidence from both parties.
This case highlights ongoing tensions between land agencies and property rights in Telangana, with the judiciary emphasizing the importance of procedural fairness and legal compliance. The court's strong stance serves as a reminder to authorities to act within the bounds of law, respecting both judicial precedents and citizens' rights.
