Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court has directed the Hyderabad Disaster Response and Assets Monitoring and Protection (HYDRA) to ensure that they follow the proper legal procedures before demolishing any illegal structures. Justice Kunuru Lakshman emphasized that HYDRA must thoroughly examine all relevant documents related to the structures they intend to demolish. These documents include the sale deed, permissions from the local authorities such as the panchayat, municipality, or GHMC, and electricity payment receipts.
The court asked Additional Advocate-General (AAG) Imran Khan to provide specific notifications that identify properties located within the Full Tank Level (FTL) boundaries. The judge also requested details on the number of buildings HYDRA has demolished under GHMC and municipal limits since its inception. The writ petition related to this issue was not concluded and remains pending for further examination.
During the hearing, Justice Lakshman expressed his serious concerns about HYDRA’s actions in demolishing structures without following the due process of law. He questioned AAG Khan on the legal provisions under which HYDRA operates and whether notices are issued to landowners before demolition. Khan clarified that HYDRA does not issue notices, but instead, the GHMC or municipality does, asking for property documents before any demolition action by HYDRA.
The case in question involves a writ filed by B Pradeep Reddy, a businessman from Jubilee Hills. He sought a court order to prevent the Irrigation and Command Area officials and HYDRA from demolishing a farmhouse reportedly belonging to K Tarakarama Rao, the BRS working president. The farmhouse, located in Janwada village in Shankarpally mandal, Ranga Reddy district, covers an area of 3,895.12 square feet.
Justice Lakshman raised concerns about inconsistencies in the state’s actions, where one department registers a property and grants construction permissions, while another later declares the property to be within the FTL and requires its demolition. He emphasized that HYDRA should not discriminate against property owners, regardless of the size of the land they own, and that the agency should treat all cases equally.
The judge also asked AAG Khan to provide more information about HYDRA, including its legal status, how it was established, its powers, and its activities. Khan argued that the petitioner had approached the court prematurely and urged the court not to issue any interim orders as they could halt the good work being done by HYDRA. He explained that HYDRA is actively removing illegal structures within the FTL of lakes, which is crucial for protecting these water bodies.
Khan also mentioned that the farmhouse in question falls within the area governed by GO111, which prohibits constructions, thereby justifying HYDRA’s actions. He requested the court to make a final decision on the writ petition.
