The Telangana High Court has rejected the Medchal-Malkajgiri Collector’s request to avoid personal appearance in a contempt case concerning a land dispute in Bachupally, directing the Malkajgiri Police Commissioner to ensure that the Collector attends the next hearing on November 25.
Justice C.V. Bhaskar Reddy held that official and election-related duties could not justify exemption from a court order requiring the Collector to appear. The Court said the Collector had a personal responsibility to provide factual and legal details on the issues identified in its earlier directions.
The contempt petition was filed by Hyderabad-based private employee Arjuna Rao, who alleged that officials had failed to properly implement orders issued on July 8 of the previous year in relation to the disputed land. The matter concerns the administration’s handling of the property and the legality of subsequent actions affecting its status.
In April, the High Court had directed the District Collector, the Revenue Divisional Officer and the Bachupally Tahsildar to protect the land and ensure that no construction took place there. The officials were also instructed to examine representations submitted by the petitioner regarding the status of the land and its possible merger with the government, and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law within eight weeks.
The Court had separately issued an interim order preventing authorities from granting building construction permits or other approvals for the lands under dispute. That direction placed the local land and planning administration under a direct obligation to prevent further development activity until the legal issues were clarified.
During an earlier hearing on October 27, the government pleader informed the Court that Arjuna Rao’s land had been acquired under the Telangana Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act. The High Court then directed the District Collector, the RDO and officials of the Land Reforms Tribunal to appear in person and explain the legal provisions used for the acquisition, the process followed and the total extent of land currently under government possession.
The Collector sought exemption from appearing, citing election-related responsibilities in his capacity as an election official and District Collector, the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls and other administrative duties. The Court rejected the request after hearing the submissions, noting that the Collector had previously received exemptions from personal appearance on February 27 and April 2.
The judge said another exemption could not be accepted in view of the clear directions issued on October 27. The order leaves the Collector responsible for appearing before the Court and responding to questions about the acquisition process, the status of the disputed land and compliance with the earlier construction-related restrictions.
The case has been adjourned to November 25. The Malkajgiri Police Commissioner has been directed to ensure the Medchal-Malkajgiri Collector’s presence on that date.
