Hyderabad: Telangana high court on Tuesday made it clear that it was not inclined to entertain any proposal for a fresh survey of land at Lothukunta over which Shanta Sriram Constructions Private Limited has already secured title and possession through litigation that travelled from the trial court to the Supreme Court .




The court also vacated a portion of a coordinate bench’s Sept 1, 2026, order that had restrained HYDRAA commissioner AV Ranganath from interfering with possession of the property while directing the construction firm to maintain status quo.




A bench of Justices Moushumi Bhattacharya and Renuka Yara passed the order while hearing a contempt appeal filed by Ranganath against a single judge’s order directing that he be relieved from the post of HYDRAA commissioner and replaced by a suitable officer.




The bench further extended the interim suspension of the order against Ranganath until the next date of hearing and adjourned the matter to Jan 20, 2027.




Senior counsel Rajeev Shakdar, appearing for Ranganath, contended that there was a dispute regarding the identity of the subject property claimed by the construction firm.




Senior counsel A Venkatesh, appearing for Shanta Sriram Constructions, argued that the company had succeeded in establishing its title and possession over the property in proceedings initiated by the state govt. He submitted that the high court had confirmed the trial court’s order and that the Supreme Court had subsequently dismissed the state’s appeal challenging the decision.




Recording the rival submissions, the bench observed: “We clarify that the scope of the present contempt appeals is restricted to the single judge’s order, which directed the appellant to be relieved from the post of HYDRAA commissioner.”




The bench further said: “Accordingly, the interim order in terms of suspending the direction of the single judge, relieving the appellant from the post of commissioner, HYDRAA, shall be continued till further orders.”




Explaining its reasons, the court added: “We deem it fit to pass this order in view of the proceedings which have preceded the present contempt appeals.”