HC directs Malkajgiri Police Commissioner to ‘ensure presence’ of Medchal Malkajgiri Collector before bench in contempt case

The Telangana High Court on Wednesday directed the Malkajgiri Police Commissioner B. Sumathi to ensure the presence of Medchal Malkajgiri Collector Manu Choudary before it on November 25 in a contempt of court case.

As per the earlier order of the HC issued on October 25, the Collector and the Revenue Divisional Officer (Land Reforms Tribunal) were supposed to appear before the HC on Wednesday in the contempt of court matter relating to a piece of land at Bachupally village. The Collector filed an interlocutory application seeking exemption from personal appearance before the HC on Wednesday.

Justice C.V. Bhaskar Reddy, dismissing the application filed by the Collector, said the reasons cited by the Collector were not satisfactory. “The explanation furnished by him, particularly with regard to his preoccupation with official duties, does not constitute sufficient ground to dispense with his presence,” the judge said in the order.

The bench wanted the Collector and the RDO to appear in person and explain the factual position of the case, the order said. The judge recalled that the Collector’s requests for exemption from personal appearance was accepted twice, February 27 and April 2. The Collector once again sought dispensation of his presence despite specific direction to appear and explain the government stand in the litigation.

The contempt of court case was filed by Koduru Arjun Rao seeking action against the officials for not implementing the HC direction in a writ petition (7833 of 2025) passed on July 8 of 2025. When the matter came up for hearing on October 25, the judge sought to know the response of the authorities over the petitioner’s representation seeking implementation of the order.

The government counsel informed the bench that the petitioner’s land was taken into possession by the authorities in accordance with the provisions of the Telangana Land Reforms (Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings) Act-1973. The question of payment of compensation or delivery of possession to the petitioner did not arise, the counsel informed the bench.