Telangana High Court freezes order to remove HYDRAA chief Ranganath

A Telangana High Court division bench on 1 September 2026 suspended a single-judge order that had directed the State to remove IPS officer A.V. Ranganath from the post of Commissioner of the Hyderabad Disaster Response and Assets Protection Agency, known as HYDRAA. Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin heard Ranganath’s appeal and stayed the operation of the impugned direction, posting the matter for further hearing on 3 November.

The contempt fight that produced the removal order sits inside a larger land dispute around Secunderabad Cantonment and Alwal. State authorities say a parcel recorded in the General Land Register as GLR No. 243—about 119 acres classified as B-2 land—was earmarked for government purposes including hospitals and educational institutions, with the State responsible for its protection. HYDRAA says it erected fencing around that parcel on 18 July after a revenue requisition, and that Defence Estates officials had confirmed the status of the land and shared geo-coordinates, including a KML file.

The flashpoint, according to HYDRAA’s case, was construction activity linked to Shantha Sriram Constructions on land the agency treats as government property under GLR No. 243, while the company relied on permissions connected to Survey Nos. 1 and 2 of Lothukunta in Alwal mandal of Medchal-Malkajgiri district. HYDRAA maintained that those survey numbers lie roughly three kilometres away from the 119-acre GLR extent. The company approached the High Court and initiated contempt proceedings against HYDRAA and, separately, against Ranganath in his personal capacity.

While dealing with that contempt, the single judge made observations on the conduct of HYDRAA authorities and directed the Chief Secretary to relieve Ranganath and appoint another officer. That personalised removal order—rather than a pure status finding on the land—became the focus of the appeal. Senior advocate Rajiv Shakdher, a former Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court, appeared for Ranganath. After hearing him, the division bench suspended the removal direction without, on the public record of the 1 September hearing, finally deciding the underlying contempt or title questions.

The stay keeps Ranganath in the HYDRAA chair for now and returns the dispute to a November calendar. For Hyderabad’s land-protection politics, the episode underlines how quickly an enforcement fencing drive can turn into personal contempt liability for the officer who heads the agency. For private claimants and builders, it shows that contested survey numbers and GLR entries will keep drawing courts into the city’s edge-land fights. The desk records the suspension, the 3 November listing, and the competing land narratives; it does not treat the stay as a final verdict on either the 119-acre parcel or the Lothukunta survey claims.