Telangana High Court Holds HYDRAA Commissioner Guilty Of Contempt For Putting Permanent Structures On Disputed Land Despite Court Order

The Telangana High Court has held the Commissioner of Hyderabad Disaster Response and Asset Protection Agency (HYDRAA) guilty of contempt in regard to an earlier order wherein the body was permitted to undertake pre-monsoon work without affecting a party's interest over a disputed land area. The court found that the body had created structures on the land in question including redevelopment of a lake, and directed it to remove all signages, structures and markers indicating HYDRAA's ownership or control over the land.A Division Bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice B.R. Madhusudhan Rao observed:“The undisputed facts as stated above, show that the respondent flouted the order dated 12.06.2025 including the submission made on its behalf that the respondent would not cause any prejudice to the petitioner's interest in respect of the subject land. The contention now raised on behalf of the respondent that prejudice can only be caused by alienation or transfer of the subject land to third parties is not acceptable. Changing the land from June - December, 2025, almost beyond recognition, amounts to prejudicially affecting the interest of the petitioner. Even otherwise, the respondent knowingly continued to disobey the order passed by this Court on 12.06.2025".The court further noted that between June, 2025 to December, 2025, the "nature and character" of the land had changed from a semi-drained and muddy terrain into a curated, enclosed recreational space designed for visitors offering entertainment facilities for relaxation. Perusing the photographs the court noted that a significant and noticeable alteration was the construction of a vertical garden bearing the name 'Bathukamma Kunta'. It said that the white board indicated that visitors' entry into the enclosed space is restricted in accordance with the timings stated thereon. "The facts narrated above, as corroborated by the photographs on record, establish that the respondent has willfully disobeyed the directions passed by the Court on 12.06.2025, whereby the Court directed the respondent to continue the order dated 28.05.2025, i.e., permitting HYDRAA to undertake necessary pre-monsoon works which were required for preventing flooding of the neighbouring colonies subject to the condition that HYDRAA shall not encroach upon the interest of the appellant in the land forming the subject matter of the pending CMA...the argument that HYDRAA has not transferred or alienated the subject land to third parties is not a defence to the respondent (Commissioner of HYDRAA) causing permanent structures to be constructed on the subject land and changing the appearance of the subject land beyond recognition. We thus hold the respondent (Commissioner of HYDRAA) to be guilty of contempt for wilful disobedience of the order dated 12.06.2025.”The Court held that the conduct of the respondent satisfied both the definition of “civil contempt” and interference with the administration of justice, since the respondent continued to alter the subject land even while the appeal concerning rights over that land remained pending before the Court.BackgroundThe petitioner had filed a suit for permanent injunction in respect of land in Hyderabad. HYDRAA, represented by its Commissioner, had been arrayed as defendant No.6 in the suit. After dismissal of the petitioner's injunction application by the trial court, the petitioner approached the High Court in appeal.In the appeal, a coordinate Bench had on 07.05.2025 directed HYDRAA to maintain status quo in respect of the suit schedule property. That order was modified on 28.05.2025, permitting HYDRAA to undertake “necessary pre-monsoon works” required to prevent inundation and flooding of neighbouring colonies. On 12.06.2025, the Bench continued the order dated 28.05.2025, after recording HYDRAA's submission that the ongoing work would not affect the appellant's interest or the subject matter of the appeal. The Court accepted that submission “as an undertaking” and continued the permission subject to HYDRAA not encroaching on the appellant's interest in the land.The petitioner filed a contempt case on 04.08.2025, alleging that HYDRAA had, despite the order dated 12.06.2025, substantially altered the nature and identity of the land. FindingsThe petitioner placed on record photographs, spanning 13.06.2025 to 02.08.2025, showing activities such as construction of culverts and inlet structures, placement of pipes, and other works on the subject land. The second set of photos, from 28.08.2025 to 16.09.2025, showed more substantial changes, including drilling of borewells, construction of a children's play area, erection of other structures and a vertical garden bearing the inscription “Bathukamma Kunta”.A newspaper report dated 17.09.2025 placed before the Court also referred to the opening of the “Renovated B'Kunta lake” and recorded that HYDRAA had installed gazebos, children's play equipment, an open-air gym and a walking track.The ...

Telangana High Court Holds HYDRAA Commissioner Guilty Of Contempt For Putting Permanent Structures On Disputed Land Despite Court Order

Ananya Tangri

Tags