Published Jul 27, 2026 | 4:31 PM ⚊ Updated Jul 27, 2026 | 4:31 PM
The latest order follows a series of proceedings in contempt petitions over a dispute concerning 40 acres in Lothkunta village.
Synopsis: The Telangana High Court has directed the State government to remove HYDRAA Commissioner AV Ranganath after rejecting his apology in contempt proceedings over repeated violations of court orders in the Lothkunta land dispute. The order follows a series of hearings in which the court took the unusual step of authorising the Army to prevent unauthorised entry into the disputed property after finding repeated breaches of its directions.
The Telangana High Court on Monday, 27 July directed the State government to remove Hyderabad Disaster Response and Asset Protection Agency (HYDRAA) Commissioner AV Ranganath from his post after rejecting his apology in a batch of contempt proceedings arising from the agency’s repeated violations of court orders in the Lothkunta land dispute.
The court observed that 63 contempt cases were pending against Ranganath and directed the Chief Secretary to appoint a suitable replacement.
The latest order follows a series of proceedings in contempt petitions filed by M/s Shanta Sriram Constructions Private Limited over a dispute concerning 40 acres in Survey Nos. 1 and 2 of Lothkunta village in Ranga Reddy district.
The developer accused HYDRAA and its Commissioner of illegally interfering with its land despite subsisting court orders. The petitioners placed photographs before the court, alleging that HYDRAA vehicles had entered the property in breach of judicial directions.
Also Read: Trainee IPS officer accused of sexual assault currently absconding
On 23 July, the High Court passed an extraordinary order authorising the Army to take into custody anyone, including HYDRAA officials, found entering the disputed property and to place them in barracks. The court also directed that vehicles found at the site could be seized.
While noting its general reluctance to involve the Army in civil property disputes, the court held that the extraordinary measure had become necessary because of repeated violations of its orders.
The court also warned that, if necessary, it could direct the Army to take HYDRAA Commissioner AV Ranganath into custody for persistently violating its orders.
A day later, the court directed Ranganath to file an affidavit tendering an apology and explaining why HYDRAA had entered the petitioner’s property despite specific directions restraining such action.
In his affidavit, Ranganath denied that HYDRAA had entered the disputed land, alleged that the petitioner had misrepresented the facts, and told the court that he had faith in the judiciary.
The court took exception to Ranganath’s statement and questioned why 63 contempt cases were pending against him. It ultimately rejected his apology and ordered his removal.
(Edited by Dese Gowda)
