HYDRAA Commissioner A.V. Ranganath.
| Photo Credit: RAMAKRISHNA G.
Telangana High Court on Thursday directed Hyderabad Disaster Management and Asset Protection Agency (HYDRAA) Commissioner A.V. Ranganath to appear before it on December 5 in a contempt of court case relating to Bathukamma Kunta lake at Amberpet here.
Passing the direction, the division bench of Justices Moushumi Bhattacharya and B.R. Madhusudhan Rao cautioned Mr. Ranganath that it would issue a non-bailable warrant if he failed to show up. The bench was hearing a contempt of court case filed by a businessman, A. Sudhakar Reddy, accusing the HYDRAA Commissioner of willfully disobeying the HC order over his claims on Bathukamma Kunta land issued on June 12.
When the matter came up for hearing on Thursday, the bench took serious exception to the absence of Mr.Ranganath in the matter. The Special Government Pleader (SGP) appearing for HYDRAA submitted an interim application seeking exemption from appearance for Thursday and the next dates of hearing.
The bench dismissed the application, expressing concern over the official not turning up before the court despite a Form-I notice being issued on October 30. It also expressed dissatisfaction over the reasons cited for exemption from personal appearance. The SGP submitted to the court that the officer was unable to come personally to the court due to official exigencies and responsibilities to attend to disaster management-related duties.
The counsel said the officer did not want to trouble the court in the matter with issues relating to his personal appearance. The bench noted that it appreciated the concern of the HYDRAA Commissioner.
In a separate case, the High Court on Thursday stayed the order of a single judge who had set aside the recruitment of 1,032 Group-II candidates across various departments in 2019. A bench of Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin, hearing a batch of appeals, ordered an interim suspension of the earlier ruling and posted the matter for the next hearing after six weeks.
In another matter, the bench issued an interim order suspending a single judge order on the selection of candidates for Group-I and Group-II posts under the 2% meritorious sportspersons quota. The single judge had held that selections under the sports quota must be made strictly in accordance with Annexures I and II, and directed that authorities follow these guidelines for all future appointments.
The counsels for the appellants contended that Annexure-III containing Form-I, II, III and IV should also be considered for deciding who was a more meritorious sportsperson. While Form-I was given to sportspersons who participated in international events for appointment to Group-I and Group-II services, Form-II was meant for Group-III services. The bench noted that the matter required detailed examination and posted it for hearing after six weeks.
Published – November 27, 2025 11:09 pm IST
