Sudhakar Reddy Challenges HYDRAA Over Alleged False Claims

BRS Leader Condemns HYDRAA Commissioner’s Claims Over Bathukammakunta Land

BRS leader Aedla Sudhakar Reddy has launched a scathing attack on HYDRAA Commissioner A.V. Ranganath for his public statements regarding the contested Bathukammakunta property in Hyderabad. The dispute has escalated after Ranganath claimed in recent media interactions that the property was designated as a water body in historical records.

Speaking to reporters in Hyderabad, Sudhakar Reddy vehemently rejected these claims, describing them as “false and defamatory.” He expressed particular concern about a public official making such statements about a matter currently under judicial review.

“I strongly condemn his statements. Being a civil servant with the All India Services, he is not supposed to disclose evidence to the press, but he did,” Reddy stated, highlighting what he believes is a serious breach of professional conduct.

The BRS leader cited specific provisions of the All India Services (Conduct) Rules of 1968, pointing out that Rule 8(4) explicitly prohibits service members from publicizing evidence involved in ongoing judicial inquiries. He further referenced Rule 17, which forbids officials from using media outlets to defend official actions that have faced criticism.

“How can he bring a sub-judice matter to the press?” questioned Reddy, suggesting that the commissioner’s actions could be interpreted as an attempt to conduct a “trial through media” and potentially influence judicial proceedings. He warned that such conduct could result in significant career penalties for the commissioner.

The dispute centers on land ownership claims at Bathukammakunta, with Ranganath reportedly questioning the validity of Reddy’s ownership documentation. The BRS leader countered this assertion by explaining legal provisions relevant to the timeframe of his acquisition.

“As per law, prior to 1994, the sale agreement need not necessarily be registered and is a legally valid document,” Reddy explained, adding that even the Civil Court has acknowledged that sale agreements before April 11, 1994, did not require registration to be legally binding.

The controversy highlights ongoing tensions between political figures and administrative bodies in Telangana over land use and urban development issues. HYDRAA (Hyderabad Disaster Response and Asset Protection Agency) was established to protect public properties and water bodies from encroachment, making such disputes particularly sensitive.

Reddy further alleged that HYDRAA has exceeded its authority by constructing permanent RCC walls and compound structures on the disputed land despite existing court orders limiting such activities. He claimed the agency had conducted unauthorized excavations and sold soil from the site for commercial purposes.

This confrontation occurs against the backdrop of increasing scrutiny of urban water bodies in Hyderabad, many of which have faced encroachment challenges in recent decades as the city has expanded. Environmental activists have long expressed concerns about the disappearance of traditional water bodies like Bathukammakunta, which historically played important roles in local water management and cultural practices.

The BRS leader concluded his statements by announcing his intention to file a formal complaint against Commissioner Ranganath with the Union Home Ministry, which oversees the All India Services.

This dispute represents a notable flashpoint in the ongoing debate about urban development, environmental conservation, and governance in rapidly growing Indian cities. The outcome could set important precedents for how historical land records are interpreted and how development agencies interact with private property claims, particularly when environmental resources are involved.

As the matter remains before the courts, legal experts suggest that both the documentation evidence and the procedural conduct of officials will likely face intense scrutiny in the coming proceedings.