HYDERABAD: The Telangana High Court has granted interim relief to HYDRAA Commissioner A V Ranganath in a land dispute at Lothu Kunta in Rangareddy district, suspending the operation of a single judge’s order and advising him to stay away from the disputed land until the matter is resolved.
A division bench headed by Justice Sam Koshi was hearing a contempt appeal concerning the manner in which HYDRAA officials allegedly dealt with land in Survey Nos. 1 and 2.
The bench observed that when the identification, boundaries and ownership of land remain disputed, authorities should exercise restraint and avoid hurried action. “If you want to continue in service, it is better to stay away from the disputed land,” the bench told Ranganath, while making it clear that it was not deciding the title or survey-number dispute.
The court noted that the dispute over Survey Nos. 1 and 2 was already sub judice and that any finding on land identification could affect other pending proceedings. It suggested that a joint survey and proper demarcation by revenue authorities should precede further action.
Counsel for HYDRAA argued that Ranganath had acted on official requisitions, government records and geo-coordinates indicating that government land identified as GLR 243 was involved. At most, the matter involved a factual error and did not constitute wilful disobedience, which is necessary for contempt, he contended.
Counsel also challenged the single judge’s reference to 62 contempt cases against the official, stating that none had resulted in a finding of guilt and that the cases had not been properly put to Ranganath for his explanation.
Another major contention was the single judge’s direction to remove Ranganath from office. Counsel argued that a contempt court cannot impose a new form of punishment beyond those recognised under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, relying on Supreme Court precedent.
The division bench observed that the conduct of the official and the punishment imposed were separate issues requiring independent consideration. It also stressed the need to protect both the petitioner’s property rights and public property if the land is ultimately found to belong to the government.
The matter has been posted to November 3.
